O slideshow foi denunciado.
Utilizamos seu perfil e dados de atividades no LinkedIn para personalizar e exibir anúncios mais relevantes. Altere suas preferências de anúncios quando desejar.
Market Probe
Things we need to know . . .
June 7, 2016
Stephen Abram
Executive Director, Federation of Ontario Public Libr...
Market Probe
Measurements:
Value, Impact, and Presence
The Case of Ontario Public Libraries
Stephen Abram, MLS , FOPL Exec...
Market Probe 3
Planning Together
At our Libraries 2020 Summit we identified:
• What we didn’t know!
• And what was that?
•...
Market Probe 4
So we cooperated and pulled our sleeves up . . .
• Starting in a hole – a previous government had cut the p...
Market Probe 5
We didn’t know enough!
• What are our numbers longitudinally?
• What are our proofs of impact? (schools, ch...
Market Probe 6
What did we need?
• Measurement not just data/statistics
• The identification of Ontario, National and inte...
Market Probe 7
What did FOPL do?
• Successfully lobbied the Ontario government to make the Ontario Provincial Public Libra...
Market Probe
Selected Highlights of What we Now Know
8
Market Probe 9
9
Market Probe 10
10
Market Probe 11
11
Market Probe 12
12
Market Probe 13
13
Market Probe 14
14
Market Probe 15
Summary Data for The Decade
• 1.2 BILLION Circulation
• 6.0 Billion Budget
• 542 Million spent on Material...
Market Probe 16
19%
15%
15%
16%
10%
12%
12%
9%
9%
7%
36%
35%
35%
29%
33%
27%
26%
26%
24%
24%
55%
50%
49%
44%
44%
39%
38%
3...
Market Probe 17
FOPL Mission
• Collaborative body offering one loud voice for all Ontario Public Libraries based
on agreed...
Market Probe 18
FOPL Positioning
• Simply put: Ontario’s Public Libraries. Now more than ever
before, they play a critical...
Market Probe 19
CAN WE TELL THE STORY?
Can we prove it?
19
Market Probe 20
FOPL Talking Points Need Proofs
The Public Library value proposition is strong and includes (but isn’t lim...
Market Probe 21
The Secret?
• Collaboration, coordination, cooperation
• All organizations started to work as one.
• FOPL,...
Market Probe 22
Marketing
• Updated a full public opinion poll in 2015 of all
Ontario residents
• Studied successful and u...
Market Probe 23
What Public Libraries Say They Mean - Missions
Market Probe 24
Progress: Marketing and Branding
• Full Ontario inventory of web and social media of ALL
public libraries
...
Market Probe 25
Ontario Public Library Usage and Visits at an All Time
High!
• More than 99% of Ontarians live in communit...
Market Probe 26
• When FOPL speaks we can point to the fact that we represent nearly all of
Ontario’s population of librar...
Market Probe 27
Building the Case for Influence
• We must increase our access to government decision-
making.
• In 2014/5 ...
Market Probe 28
Selected Key Results
1. Libraries are now mentioned in all critical government policy
documents
2. Attenda...
FEDERATION OF ONTARIO PUBLIC
LIBRARIES RESEARCH
Prepared for: Federation of Ontario Public Libraries Research Task Force
A...
Market Probe 30
Table of Contents
Executive Summary 3
Background and Methodology 8
Results from the Telephone Survey 13
Us...
Market Probe
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Market Probe
Market Probe 32
Executive Summary
• Ontarians’ overall opinions of the public library and the value it contributes to the
...
Market Probe 33
Executive Summary
• Numbers of library users have stayed relatively consistent, but usage patterns
have ch...
Market Probe 34
Executive Summary
• Evolving technology, channel, and media preferences will require the public
library to...
Market Probe 35
Executive Summary
• The future of the public library remains uncertain and must be shaped according
to the...
Market Probe
BACKGROUND AND METHODOLOGY
Market Probe
Market Probe 37
Research Objectives
• This represents the fourth wave of a study that has been conducted every five
years ...
Market Probe 38
Method
• A dual telephone/online method was used for the 2015 study. The telephone survey
replicated the p...
Market Probe 39
Method
Telephone Survey Component
• A total of 600 telephone interviews were conducted with Ontario adults...
Market Probe 40
Reading the Charts
66% in the total
population, but 81%
among library
cardholders
• Many of the charts con...
Market Probe
RESULTS FROM THE TELEPHONE SURVEY
Market Probe
USE OF THE PUBLIC LIBRARY
Market Probe
Market Probe 43
Library Cardholders
Q.1
Base: All respondents (2000 - 1007; 2005 - 1102; 2010 - 1100; 2015 - 600).
*Notabl...
Market Probe 44
Past Year In-Person Use of Public Library
Q.2
Base: All respondents (2000 - 1007; 2005 - 1102; 2010 - 1100...
Market Probe 45
Past Year Public Library In-Person Visit Frequency
Q.2
Base: Past-year public library visitors (2000 - 678...
Market Probe 46
23%
16%
14%
12%
4%
19%
13%
13%
10%
12%
7%
10%
7%
18%
11%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Consult a librarian
Renew...
Market Probe 47
Past Year Use of Public Library’s Website
Times Accessed Library’s Website
in Past Year
Q.3
Base: All resp...
Market Probe 48
42%
30%
24%
26%
14%
14%
10%
5%
34%
25%
21%
23%
12%
5%
4%
33%
14%
14%
13%
7%
2%
8%
5%
2%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80%...
Market Probe 49
14%
86%
12%
88%
7%
93%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Yes
No
• In 2015, a modest gain has been made in library us...
Market Probe 50
Ways Users Access the Public Library
Q.2/3/4
Base: Library users (2010 - 757; 2015 - 417).
37%
1% 1%
13%
1...
Market Probe 51
Past Year Public Library Interaction Through Social Media
Q.4c
Base: All respondents (2015 - 600).
New que...
Market Probe 52
49%
26%
22%
8%
50%
31%
23%
8%
47%
27%
19%
7%
51%
24%
17%
9%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Children
Spouse/partne...
Market Probe 53
Total Usage of the Public Library
No One
21%
Other
Household
Member(s)
Only
10%
With Others in
Household
4...
Market Probe 54
84%
56%
34%
28%
26%
25%
23%
23%
16%
14%
10%
90%
70%
41%
33%
26%
17%
33%
23%
13%
21%
16%
88%
73%
38%
31%
32...
Market Probe 55
Reasons for Personally Using the Public Library
by Frequency of Library Use (Current Year)
Q.6a
Base: Freq...
Market Probe
USE OF ALTERNATIVE INFORMATION CHANNELS
Market Probe
Market Probe 57
6%
5%
3%
3%
4%
4%
1%
11%
4%
1%
5%
7%
4%
2%
2%
6%
7%
2%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Due to illness /
injury / t...
Market Probe 58
Experience Using the Library
Q.9d/e/f
Base: Past-year non-users of library (191); All users of library (58...
Market Probe 59
87%
83%
44%
42%
41%
23%
17%
88%
83%
50%
23%
26%
21%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
At home
At work
At other place...
Market Probe 60
• With the exception of social networking, which has seen a significant increase, the ways in which the In...
Market Probe 61
Books Read in the Past Year
Q.13f
Base: All respondents (2015 - 600). New question in 2015.
• The vast maj...
Market Probe 62
Format of Books Read in the Past Year
Q.13g
Base: Read any books in the past year (2015 - 507). New questi...
Market Probe 63
Cardholder
Yes 28%
No 20%
In-Person Library Use
None 19%
1-10 times 24%
11+ times 37%
Books Read in Past Y...
Market Probe 64
42%
26%
29%
3%
43%
28%
28%
1%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Bookstores more
About the same
Libraries more
Don't ...
ATTITUDES TOWARD THE PUBLIC LIBRARY
Market Probe
Market Probe 66
Opinion of Future Importance of Public Libraries
Q.15
Base: All respondents (2000 - 1007; 2005 - 1102; 201...
Market Probe 67
• When asked theoretically about their local library closing, a large majority of respondents said that th...
Market Probe 68
Impact of Public Library Closing on Family
Q.16a-b
Base: All respondents (2015 - 600). New question in 201...
Market Probe 69
Benefit of Public Libraries Relative to
Other Municipal Tax-Supported Services
Q.16
Base: All respondents ...
Market Probe 70
68
60
56
54
50
45
45
40
37
31
31
28
21
69
46
55
45
42
47
27
30
24
22
25
18
• In 2015, being a lender of ma...
Market Probe 71
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Value of Services by How Library Ranks
Compared to Other Municipal Tax-Supported Se...
Market Probe 72
64%
45%
36%
26%
26%
25%
19%
13%
12%
9%
7%
6%
4%
72%
55%
49%
25%
35%
28%
15%
13%
14%
12%
10%
8%
0% 20% 40% ...
Market Probe 73
Value & Usage Combined
Q.17/18
Base: All respondents (2015 - 600).
• For each of the library services, the...
Market Probe 74
Information Technology Training that Could Be Offered
Q.13b
Base: All respondents (2015 - 600).
*Change of...
Market Probe 75
Believability of Positioning Statements
Q.19
Base: All respondents (2010 - 1100; 2015 - 600).
• Compared t...
DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE OF RESPONDENTS
Market Probe
Market Probe 77
Q.A/B
Base: All respondents (2000 - 1007; 2005 - 1102; 2010 - 1100; 2015 - 600).
Respondent Age / Gender
R...
Market Probe 78
40%
12%
15%
11%
8%
35%
13%
15%
14%
11%
40%
18%
15%
11%
10%
36%
16%
15%
13%
10%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
5 o...
Market Probe 79
28%
1%
27%
70%
15%
45%
10%
25%
2%
24%
73%
18%
44%
11%
29%
2%
27%
69%
19%
41%
8%
35%
2%
32%
64%
20%
36%
7%
...
Market Probe 80
Ontario Region / Community Size
Base: All respondents (2000 - 1007; 2005 - 1102; 2010 - 1100; 2015 - 600)....
Market Probe 81
Aboriginal Status / Years in Canada / Language Spoken
Q.22a/b/c/23
Base: All respondents (2000 - 1007; 200...
Market Probe 82
Challenges in Using the Library
Q.23a
Base: All respondents (2015 - 600). New questions in 2015.
8%
7%
0% ...
Market Probe
RESULTS FROM THE ONLINE SURVEY
Market Probe
Market Probe
USE OF THE PUBLIC LIBRARY
Market Probe
Market Probe 85
Characteristics of Closest Public Library
Q.1a/b
Base: All respondents (1102).
Condition of Library Distan...
Market Probe 86
Library Cardholders
Q.1
Base: All respondents (1102).
• Internet research panel members were less likely t...
Market Probe 87
Past Year In-Person Use of Public Library
Q.2
Base: All respondents (1102).
• Despite the lower incidence ...
Market Probe 88
16%
14%
17%
53%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
21+ times
11 to 20 times
6 to 10 times
1 to 5 times
Past Year Publ...
Market Probe 89
20%
9%
9%
6%
5%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Consult a librarian
Renew an item
Reserve an item
Enquire / reques...
Market Probe 90
20%
37%
43%
11 or more times
1 to 10 times
Not at all
Past Year Use of Public Library’s Website
Times Acce...
Market Probe 91
57%
35%
29%
26%
14%
12%
9%
5%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Check catalogue
Reserve an item
Renew an item
Downlo...
Market Probe 92
41%59%
Yes
No
39%
28%
15%
14%
14%
9%
8%
6%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
E-books fiction
E-books non-fiction
Dig...
Market Probe 93
Ways Users Access the Public Library
Q.2/3/4a/b
Base: Library users (804).
• Higher library website usage ...
Market Probe 94
Past Year Public Library Interaction Through Social Media
Q.4c
Base: All respondents (1102).
• Interacting...
Market Probe 95
45%
27%
19%
9%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Spouse/partner
Children
Others
Past Year Use of Public Library by
O...
Market Probe 96
Total Usage of the Public Library
Q.2/3/4a/b
Base: All respondents (1102).
• The breakout of library usage...
Market Probe 97
68%
34%
31%
24%
22%
20%
15%
14%
12%
10%
9%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%Q.6a/b
Base: Those who personally visite...
Market Probe 98
90%
46%
43%
32%
31%
30%
22%
21%
18%
11%
11%
58%
24%
31%
20%
15%
19%
8%
12%
12%
9%
10%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 1...
Market Probe
USE OF ALTERNATIVE INFORMATION CHANNELS
Market Probe
Market Probe 100
43%
28%
18%
16%
12%
6%
5%
5%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Not interested
Get information
from other sources
Pr...
Market Probe 101
Experience Using the Library
• Similar percentages of library non-users from the telephone and web survey...
Market Probe 102
• As might be expected, web panel members are more likely than phone respondents to have Internet access ...
Market Probe 103
99%
86%
84%
73%
56%
33%
24%
23%
6%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Search for specific
information of interest
Us...
Market Probe 104
Books Read in the Past Year
Q.13f
Base: All respondents (1102).
• Web panelists tended to read fewer book...
Market Probe 105
Format of Books Read in the Past Year
Q.13g
Base: Read any books in the past year (946).
• Those who comp...
Market Probe 106
12%
18%
51%
19%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
More than 10 times
6 to 10 times
1 to 5 times
None
• In the web s...
Market Probe 107
14%
14%
41%
31%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
More than 10 times
6 to 10 times
1 to 5 times
None
• The percenta...
Market Probe 108
22%
47%
31%
Online vendor more
About the same
Bookstores more
Frequency of Visiting Online Book Vendor vs...
Market Probe 109
Library vs. Bookstore Usage, In-Person and Online
9%
21%
26%
12%
21%
10%
13%
15%
19%
10%
25%
18%
0
5
10
1...
Market Probe 110
33%67%
Yes
No
88%
35%
22%
11%
4%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
A desktop or laptop
computer
A tablet
A smartpho...
Market Probe 111
27%
22%
15%
13%
13%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Zinio
Hoopla
AskON
Indieflix
Freegal
Familiarity and Use of N...
Market Probe
ATTITUDES TOWARD THE PUBLIC LIBRARY
Market Probe
Market Probe 113
• Web panelists were not quite as concerned as telephone survey respondents about the impact a potential ...
Market Probe 114
• Online survey participants were more apt to think closing of their local library would have a minor rat...
Market Probe 115
33%
56%
11%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Top of list
Middle of list
Bottom of list
Benefit of Public Libraries...
Market Probe 116
53
41
40
40
39
37
35
30
28
26
23
22
21
• Except for a couple of items near the bottom of the list, web pa...
Market Probe 117
Value of Services by How Library Ranks
Compared to Other Municipal Tax-Supported Services
MeanScore
Q.16/...
Market Probe 118
• As was the case with value perceptions, web panelists claimed that they and others in their households ...
Market Probe 119
Value & Usage Combined
Q.17/18
Base: All respondents (1102).
0
40
80
Assistance in finding information
Ea...
Market Probe 120
Lender of
Materials
Reference
Centre
Government Services
Kiosks
Meeting Place
Early Literacy
Programs
Pla...
Market Probe 121
A program that allows people to try out the newest tech devices or
applications, such as 3D printers or l...
Market Probe 122
Best Way to Inform about What’s Going On at the Library
Q.13e
Base: All respondents (1102).
66%
51%
45%
3...
Market Probe 123
Believability of Positioning Statements
Q.19
Base: All respondents (1102).
• Four of the positioning stat...
Market Probe
DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE OF RESPONDENTS
Market Probe
Market Probe 125
Q.A/B
Base: All respondents (1102).
Respondent Age / Gender
Respondent Age Gender
12%
16%
38%
35%
0% 20% ...
Market Probe 126
22%
8%
8%
6%
8%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
5 or younger
6 to 10
11 to 14
15 to 17
Number in Household / Pres...
Fopl market probe poll final report 2015 05-08 - v1 - dl
Fopl market probe poll final report 2015 05-08 - v1 - dl
Fopl market probe poll final report 2015 05-08 - v1 - dl
Fopl market probe poll final report 2015 05-08 - v1 - dl
Fopl market probe poll final report 2015 05-08 - v1 - dl
Próximos SlideShares
Carregando em…5
×

0

Compartilhar

Baixar para ler offline

Fopl market probe poll final report 2015 05-08 - v1 - dl

Baixar para ler offline

Market Probe at GPL

  • Seja a primeira pessoa a gostar disto

Fopl market probe poll final report 2015 05-08 - v1 - dl

  1. 1. Market Probe Things we need to know . . . June 7, 2016 Stephen Abram Executive Director, Federation of Ontario Public Libraries Guelph Public Library
  2. 2. Market Probe Measurements: Value, Impact, and Presence The Case of Ontario Public Libraries Stephen Abram, MLS , FOPL Executive Director June 7, 2016
  3. 3. Market Probe 3 Planning Together At our Libraries 2020 Summit we identified: • What we didn’t know! • And what was that? • What were our priorities? At our Libraries 2025 Summit we confirmed: • Our next set of priorities. 3
  4. 4. Market Probe 4 So we cooperated and pulled our sleeves up . . . • Starting in a hole – a previous government had cut the provincial library grant by 50% • Yuck – hand wringing and whining and then we adapted. • We convinced the provincial government to invest $18 million in all systems • This year we accessed another $10 million in research and innovation grants 4
  5. 5. Market Probe 5 We didn’t know enough! • What are our numbers longitudinally? • What are our proofs of impact? (schools, children’s programs, summer reading, economic, new Canadians, etc. etc.) • How do our ‘places’ need to change? • How do we develop staff at scale? • What does the public think? • What motivates politicians and civil servants? • What is our brand and how do we cost-effectively access all Ontarians? 5
  6. 6. Market Probe 6 What did we need? • Measurement not just data/statistics • The identification of Ontario, National and international core data • The identification of core operational measures for libraries • The identification of core digital measures for libraries • The identification of comparative measures for libraries and appropriate cohort analyses • The study of visual representation of library data that informs and influences management and funding bodies • The study of what ‘proofs’ libraries can adopt from their data to prove and communicate the value of the public library in the 21st Century portfolio of services and programs. • The delineation of audiences, outputs, and needs to restrict scope creep and overbuilding of the data engine. 6
  7. 7. Market Probe 7 What did FOPL do? • Successfully lobbied the Ontario government to make the Ontario Provincial Public Library Data Collection project open data under the provincial policy for the Open Data Initiative. • Harvested 1996-2014 PL Data and developed a database of these data resulting in the publishing of many reports and analyses of these data from 2001 through 2014 and the identification of trends, creation of visuals, and communication of these data. These data were published in library size cohorts, North and South, and for First Nations libraries as well as for Ontario as a whole. In 2016 the intent is to make the database available to members for strategic planning use. • Authored a FOPL White Paper on the development of benchmarks and a comparative index for Ontario public library systems. • Designed, created and delivered three 2 day symposia in partnership with the iSchool at the University of Toronto and a series of three webinars for FOPL about the use and interpretation of library statistics as well as the creation of new comparative • Did the 2015 Market Probe Canada public opinion poll (digital and telephone) of Ontarians and their attitudes about Ontario’s public libraries. • Stephen is contracted to write a book chapter on these projects and value measures for public libraries in 2016. • Stephen has sat on the University of Toronto’s iSchool Dean’s Council for over 20 years including advising on the recent development of a Big Data program. 7
  8. 8. Market Probe Selected Highlights of What we Now Know 8
  9. 9. Market Probe 9 9
  10. 10. Market Probe 10 10
  11. 11. Market Probe 11 11
  12. 12. Market Probe 12 12
  13. 13. Market Probe 13 13
  14. 14. Market Probe 14 14
  15. 15. Market Probe 15 Summary Data for The Decade • 1.2 BILLION Circulation • 6.0 Billion Budget • 542 Million spent on Materials • 115 Million spent on Electronic Materials • 1.6 Million total Programs • 31 Million total Attendance 15
  16. 16. Market Probe 16 19% 15% 15% 16% 10% 12% 12% 9% 9% 7% 36% 35% 35% 29% 33% 27% 26% 26% 24% 24% 55% 50% 49% 44% 44% 39% 38% 35% 33% 31% Very Likely Somewhat Likely Total Interest in new library service concepts varies, in many cases based on age A program that allows people to try out the newest tech devices or applications, such as 3D printers or laser cutters Library kiosks located throughout the community where people can check out books, movies or music without having to go to the library itself A personalized online account that gives you recommendations based on your past library activity A cell phone app that allows you to access library services from your mobile phone An online research service where you could pose questions and get responses from librarians A cell phone app that helps you locate material easily in the library using GPS E-book readers already loaded with the book you want to read Instruction on how to use handheld reading devices and tablets Classes on how to download library e-books to handheld devices A digital media lab where you could create and upload new digital content like your own movies or e-books Likelihood of Using Different Library Services 64% 46% 57% 39% 61% 39% 62% 24% 43% 37% 54% 19% 45% 34% 31% 40% 30% 38% 42% 21% By Age 18-34 55+
  17. 17. Market Probe 17 FOPL Mission • Collaborative body offering one loud voice for all Ontario Public Libraries based on agreed cooperative strategies, and priorities and research. 17
  18. 18. Market Probe 18 FOPL Positioning • Simply put: Ontario’s Public Libraries. Now more than ever before, they play a critical role in the social, educational, cultural and economic success of the communities in our province. • Public Libraries are an essential investment in the future of our communities and are essential drivers of success in school preparedness, reading readiness, economic and employment success, and social equity. • As the development of the knowledge economy progresses, public libraries are a vital link for every resident and every community to ensure success of all Ontarians, regardless of location or background. 18
  19. 19. Market Probe 19 CAN WE TELL THE STORY? Can we prove it? 19
  20. 20. Market Probe 20 FOPL Talking Points Need Proofs The Public Library value proposition is strong and includes (but isn’t limited to): – Excellent Return on Investment – Strong Economic Development – Great Employment Support – Welcoming New Canadians – Provable Early Literacy Development – Ongoing Support for Formal Education and Homework Help – Serve the whole community equitably – Affordable access to community resources – Access to Government Services and e-government – Questions Deserve Quality Answers – Support Cultural Vitality – Recognized and Valued Leisure Activities for majority of Ontarians 20
  21. 21. Market Probe 21 The Secret? • Collaboration, coordination, cooperation • All organizations started to work as one. • FOPL, SOLS, OLS-North, CULC, OLA (OPLA and OLBA), consortia, etc. • We shared the load(s)! 21
  22. 22. Market Probe 22 Marketing • Updated a full public opinion poll in 2015 of all Ontario residents • Studied successful and unsuccessful campaigns in libraries • Did a census of all 304 systems social media and website presences • Surveyed CAOs about perceptions and budgets • Developing tagline with person-on-the-street interviews 22
  23. 23. Market Probe 23 What Public Libraries Say They Mean - Missions
  24. 24. Market Probe 24 Progress: Marketing and Branding • Full Ontario inventory of web and social media of ALL public libraries • Person-on-the-street interviews to develop province- wide tagline in 2016 • Building an Open Media Desk and social media dashboard to entire sector in province • Hiring 3-4 part-time journalists to build articles, social media, and video at critical mass • Release, release, release • Build a media culture of good not perfect 24
  25. 25. Market Probe 25 Ontario Public Library Usage and Visits at an All Time High! • More than 99% of Ontarians live in communities served by a public library and 74% used their library in the past year. • Ontario libraries have nearly 31 million volumes in circulation. That’s equivalent to 2.3 books for every Ontarian. • In 2014 Ontario public libraries – circulated 131 million items. – received almost 72 million in-person visits – provided 203,964 programs with over 3.3 million attendees • served the public through 1,157 library service points (main libraries, library branches, deposit stations and bookmobile stops) • Every library branch in the province provides access to electronic information through the Internet. 25
  26. 26. Market Probe 26 • When FOPL speaks we can point to the fact that we represent nearly all of Ontario’s population of library members. This is, indeed, at the riding level. • There are few exceptions. 26
  27. 27. Market Probe 27 Building the Case for Influence • We must increase our access to government decision- making. • In 2014/5 FOPL: – Submission to the Minister of Finance’s Pre-budget Consultation 2016 – Submitted Cabinet level documents on Ontario’s Culture Strategy, Community Hubs, Municipal Act consultations. . . – Co-planned and implemented the second annual large scale Library Day at Queen’s Park – Co-planned an all day symposium of over 10 ministries with over 150 civil servants and librarians / trustees – Met regularly with our ‘minister’ and key staff on issues like the OLCF, CDF, Open Data, Ministry Awards, operating grants, OPLW, etc. – Contracted for legal opinions on legislative changes 27
  28. 28. Market Probe 28 Selected Key Results 1. Libraries are now mentioned in all critical government policy documents 2. Attendance at Programs can exceed 25,000+ for some in a day! 3. OLA coordinates reading programs at the provincial level (TD Summer Reading, First of Trees) 4. We have agreed provincial competencies for all positions and technology infrastructure for professional development 5. We are investing in VIP marketing that is cost-effective and based in research 6. We are focused on community-led strategic planning, investments in advanced technology infrastructure and training 7. We know our numbers, demographics and are investing in R&D for qualitative data 8. We are aligning with government ‘language’ and priorities 28
  29. 29. FEDERATION OF ONTARIO PUBLIC LIBRARIES RESEARCH Prepared for: Federation of Ontario Public Libraries Research Task Force April, 2015 Market Probe
  30. 30. Market Probe 30 Table of Contents Executive Summary 3 Background and Methodology 8 Results from the Telephone Survey 13 Use of the Public Library 14 Use of Alternative Information Channels 28 Attitudes Toward the Public Library 37 Demographic Profile of Respondents 48 Results from the Online Survey 55 Use of the Public Library 56 Use of Alternative Information Channels 71 Attitudes Toward the Public Library 84 Demographic Profile of Respondents 96 Page
  31. 31. Market Probe EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Market Probe
  32. 32. Market Probe 32 Executive Summary • Ontarians’ overall opinions of the public library and the value it contributes to the communities it serves remain very strong. – The public library’s position relative to other municipal tax-supported services is consistent with the findings from five years ago, and reactions to positioning statements included in the previous study have actually improved slightly. – Reacting to new positioning statements tested this year, most Ontarians acknowledge the public library’s role in advancing literacy, equal opportunity, and quality of life in their communities. – The value of certain services (early literacy programs, services to new Canadians, information for the unemployed, training in how to access information online, and being a focal point or meeting place within the community) has increased over the past five years. – A majority of Ontario residents feel that if their local library were to close, it would have a major impact on their community (but usually less of an impact on themselves and their family).
  33. 33. Market Probe 33 Executive Summary • Numbers of library users have stayed relatively consistent, but usage patterns have changed significantly over the past five years. – The proportion of adults not using the public library at all in the previous 12 months has not risen over the last 15 years, in spite of the fact that information has become increasingly available from other sources. – Individuals’ library card ownership has increased since 2010, however there are signs that library usage at a household level may be softening slightly. – In-person library visit frequency has not changed since the first year the study was conducted, but 2015 represents the first time that the number of people using the library both online and in-person during the past year has overtaken the number of in-person- only visitors. – People appear to be more selective in choosing which library services to take advantage of, as reported usage of many library services is down significantly versus five years ago (wireless network access being the main exception).
  34. 34. Market Probe 34 Executive Summary • Evolving technology, channel, and media preferences will require the public library to review its strategies and tactics on a regular basis. – It has become clear that electronic access is complementing, not replacing, bricks and mortar establishments, implying that duplication of hard copy and electronic materials, as well as increased channel costs, are likely to continue for the foreseeable future. – Perhaps equally daunting is the need to ensure compatibility with an ever expanding array of devices being used to access the Internet (and particularly challenging to libraries, the substitution of multi-purpose tablets and smartphones for single-purpose devices like e-readers). • Effectively communicating information about new services will be as critical as deciding which to invest in. – While still important, traditional library services, such as lending materials and helping people find information, are not increasing in usage or perceived value. – Interest in new service concepts is fragmented, meaning hard decisions will need to be made about which to develop and roll out, and for which audiences. – New services will need to be publicized as they become available, and in many instances, communications will have to be geared to relevant segments to create sufficient awareness, interest, and take-up. – Since email is clearly the preferred method of receiving information about the library, creation of user groups and maintenance of contact lists will likely become critical in order to reach segments of interest and establish an ongoing dialogue with users.
  35. 35. Market Probe 35 Executive Summary • The future of the public library remains uncertain and must be shaped according to the needs of a new generation of users. – Older people will undoubtedly continue to value the library for its heritage and social value, but those feelings will not automatically be passed down to a younger generation that likely has different views of public institutions, not to mention unique information needs and media habits. – Not every library can afford to be all things to all residents of the community it serves, so there may be a need to develop specific capabilities centrally or in selected locations, along with the means of delivering them on a more universal basis. – Finally, the library needs to address a challenge that was identified when this study was first conducted and which still remains in 2015 – how to convince more people that the public library can be of as much value to them personally as they think it is to others.
  36. 36. Market Probe BACKGROUND AND METHODOLOGY Market Probe
  37. 37. Market Probe 37 Research Objectives • This represents the fourth wave of a study that has been conducted every five years since 2000. • Consistent with past waves, objectives of this year’s study were to: – Understand Ontario residents’ opinions about the use, role and impact of public libraries, and how those opinions have changed over time; – Separate public opinion by level of usage of public libraries (including non-use); and – Identify areas of strength and weakness for the public library. • Results will be used to: – Monitor the status of the library; – Formulate strategy to ensure libraries remain a relevant and useful part of the community; – Identify priorities for 2015-2017; and – Provide input to the creation of a new marketing communication plan.
  38. 38. Market Probe 38 Method • A dual telephone/online method was used for the 2015 study. The telephone survey replicated the procedures used previously and provides a basis for comparing to past results. The new online survey component establishes a viable baseline for future research, given the technological changes that are impacting not only the public library, but also the research industry. • For both survey components, quotas were set by age and gender using Statistics Canada population figures; data is therefore unweighted. • For the purposes of analyzing results, six Ontario regions were defined by postal code, as follows: Northern (P) Metro Toronto (M) Eastern (K) GTA Urban (L within GTA) Southwestern (N) GTA Ex-urban (L outside GTA)
  39. 39. Market Probe 39 Method Telephone Survey Component • A total of 600 telephone interviews were conducted with Ontario adults from February 26th to March 16th, 2015. Sampling was conducted such that all Ontario households with a landline had an equal chance of being called. • The sample size (600) allows inferences to be made about the total Ontario adult population with a margin of error of +4.0%, at a 95% confidence level. • Average length of the telephone survey was 15 minutes. • Respondents were given a choice of completing the survey in English (96%) or French (4%). Those who speak other languages were excluded (approximately 7% of households contacted). Online Survey Component • A total of 1,102 online surveys were conducted with Ontario adults from March 5th to March 10th, 2015. Respondents were sourced using Delvinia’s AskingCanadians online panel. • On average, respondents took 13 minutes to complete the online survey. • Respondents were given a choice of completing the survey in English (92%) or French (8%).
  40. 40. Market Probe 40 Reading the Charts 66% in the total population, but 81% among library cardholders • Many of the charts contain profiling information for a key variable, which is indicated by a blue arrow pointing away from it toward a sidebar. In the chart below, the key variable is the percentage of respondents who said they used the public library in the past year (66%). The sidebar shows the same statistic within specific groups. For example, the first category break in the sidebar shows that the percentage who have visited the library among those who are cardholders is 81%, while among non-cardholders it is 25%. • Throughout the report, a red circle or square indicates that a 2015 observation is significantly higher or lower, respectively, than the previous survey. Bold text within sidebars indicates that, for 2015, the bolded subgroups’ results are significantly higher than one or more of the non-bolded groups’ results. 66% 34% 66% 34% 66% 34% 68% 32% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Yes No Cardholder Yes 81 No 25 Bookstore Use None 53 1-10 times 65 11+ times 75 Library vs. Bookstore Usage More 97 Same 85 Less 41 68% 32% 65% 35% 65% 35% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Yes No 2015 2010 2005 2000
  41. 41. Market Probe RESULTS FROM THE TELEPHONE SURVEY Market Probe
  42. 42. USE OF THE PUBLIC LIBRARY Market Probe
  43. 43. Market Probe 43 Library Cardholders Q.1 Base: All respondents (2000 - 1007; 2005 - 1102; 2010 - 1100; 2015 - 600). *Notable for lack of difference. 73% 26% 68% 32% 65% 35% 65% 35% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Yes No • Compared to previous study waves, there has been an increase in the number of Ontarians claiming to be cardholders. • The desire to have Internet access, both to and while at the library, may be promoting increased card usage. • Interestingly, cardholder incidence does not vary significantly across the different age groupings. In-Person Library Use None 40% 1-10 times 85% 11+ times 96% Social Media Interaction with Library Yes 84% No 72% Bookstore Use None 65% 1-10 times 73% 11+ times 78% Age* 18-24 77% 25-34 72% 35-54 73% 55+ 72% Access Library by Phone / Text Yes 93% No 67% Access Library by Internet Yes 92% No 59% Have Internet Access None 66% Work 72% Home 74% School 80% Library 93% Other 76% Books Read in Past Year None 47% 1-5 63% 6-15 80% 16+ 84% Library vs Bookstore Usage More 97% Same 88% Less 52% Library Benefits Top 84% Middle 70% Bottom 52% Children in Home Yes 78% No 70% Education High school 65% Univ/college 77% Grad school 68% Region North 62% East 68% Southwest 81% Metro T.O. 74% GTA Urban 75% GTA Ex-urban 69% 68% 32% 65% 35% 65% 35% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Yes No 2015 2010 2005 2000
  44. 44. Market Probe 44 Past Year In-Person Use of Public Library Q.2 Base: All respondents (2000 - 1007; 2005 - 1102; 2010 - 1100; 2015 - 600). • As has been the case since 2005, two-thirds of Ontarians report visiting the library in person within the last year. • In-person use of the library skews to younger age groups and those with higher education, and appears to be more prevalent in Southwest Ontario. 66% 34% 66% 34% 66% 34% 68% 32% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Yes No Cardholder Yes 81% No 25% Books Read in Past Year None 22% 1-5 56% 6-15 78% 16+ 79% Bookstore Use None 53% 1-10 times 65% 11+ times 75% Library vs. Bookstore Usage More 97% Same 85% Less 41% Access Library by Phone / Text Yes 93% No 57% Have Internet Access None 48% Work 66% Home 68% School 77% Library 93% Other 71% Access Library by Internet Yes 93% No 46% Social Media Interaction with Library Yes 86% No 64% Future Importance of Library More 77% Same 66% Less 57% Library Benefits Top 79% Middle 64% Bottom 34% Age 18-24 73% 25-34 71% 35-54 66% 55+ 61% Children in Home Yes 75% No 61% Education High school 57% Univ/college 69% Grad school 72% Region North 56% East 61% Southwest 73% Metro T.O. 65% GTA Urban 69% GTA Ex-urban 61% 68% 32% 65% 35% 65% 35% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Yes No 2015 2010 2005 2000
  45. 45. Market Probe 45 Past Year Public Library In-Person Visit Frequency Q.2 Base: Past-year public library visitors (2000 - 678; 2005 - 712; 2010 - 723; 2015 - 394). • Despite the increased use of other channels, frequency of visiting the library in person has not changed significantly over the past 15 years. In fact, those who access the library by electronic means are also more apt to report having made a greater number of in-person visits. • The percentage of library visitors who visit frequently (over 20 times in the past year) varies quite a bit by region. 26% 14% 18% 41% 27% 16% 19% 38% 26% 18% 16% 40% 28% 17% 18% 37% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 21+ times 11 to 20 times 6 to 10 times 1 to 5 times Cardholder Yes 29% No 8% Books Read in Past Year None 21% 1-5 8% 6-15 14% 16+ 41% Library vs. Bookstore Usage More 44% Same 17% Less 5% Access Library by Phone / Text Yes 39% No 20% Access Library by Internet Yes 34% No 16% Social Media Interaction with Library Yes 39% No 25% Future Importance of Library More 34% Same 25% Less 20% Library Benefits Top 35% Middle 21% Bottom 9% Region North 32% East 21% Southwest 32% Metro T.O. 34% GTA Urban 17% GTA Ex-urban 29% 68% 32% 65% 35% 65% 35% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Yes No 2015 2010 2005 2000
  46. 46. Market Probe 46 23% 16% 14% 12% 4% 19% 13% 13% 10% 12% 7% 10% 7% 18% 11% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Consult a librarian Renew an item Reserve an item Enquire / request changes to account Past Year Use of Public Library by Telephone / Text Q.4/7 Base: All respondents (2000 - 1007; 2005 - 1102; 2010 - 1100; 2015 - 600). *Wording changed in 2015 from “Telephone” to “Telephone / Text”. Telephone / Text* Gender Male 18% Female 28% Age 18-24 15% 25-34 18% 35-54 22% 55+ 29% • With this year’s addition of texting in the question wording, more Ontarians in 2015 indicate they have contacted the library in the past using their phone. • The fact that phone access tends to be more prevalent among seniors suggests that voice calls likely still outnumber text messages by a wide margin. 68% 32% 65% 35% 65% 35% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Yes No 2015 2010 2005 2000 Telephone = 22% Text = 2%
  47. 47. Market Probe 47 Past Year Use of Public Library’s Website Times Accessed Library’s Website in Past Year Q.3 Base: All respondents (2005 - 1102; 2010 - 1100; 2015 - 600). Any Access of Library’s Website • Over the past five years, there has been a significant increase in the number of Ontarians accessing the public library by Internet, as well as in the percentage of those frequently accessing the library that way. • Incidence of accessing the library by Internet increases with frequency of in-person visits, suggesting that Internet access is a complement to, not a replacement for, more traditional library usage. 17% 25% 58% 12% 22% 66% 9% 28% 63% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 11 or more times 1 to 10 times Not at all Cardholder Yes 53% No 12% In-Person Library Use None 9% 1-10 times 49% 11+ times 75% Bookstore Use None 28% Any 45% Access Library by Phone / Text Yes 62% No 36% Social Media Interaction with Library Yes 75% No 39% Library vs. Bookstore Usage More 69% Same 57% Less 22% Education High school 30% Univ/college 47% Grad school 50%
  48. 48. Market Probe 48 42% 30% 24% 26% 14% 14% 10% 5% 34% 25% 21% 23% 12% 5% 4% 33% 14% 14% 13% 7% 2% 8% 5% 2% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Check catalogue Renew an item Reserve an item Access other materials via library's website Download an item Manage / make changes to library account Consult a librarian by e-mail, chat or IM Past Year Use of Public Library by Internet Q.3/8a Base: All respondents (2000 - 1007; 2005 - 1102; 2010 - 1100; 2015 - 600). Internet Community Size <30K 29% 30K - <500K 38% 500K+ 49% Region North 22% East 41% Southwest 40% Metro T.O. 55% GTA Urban 44% GTA Ex-urban 42% • In addition to the general increase in use of the public library via Internet, more Ontario residents are checking library catalogues online and downloading items. • Geographic differences suggest that availability of high speed Internet may be impacting online usage of the library in certain parts of the province. 68% 32% 65% 35% 65% 35% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Yes No 2015 2010 2005 2000
  49. 49. Market Probe 49 14% 86% 12% 88% 7% 93% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Yes No • In 2015, a modest gain has been made in library users obtaining materials via the library’s website, with fictional E-books rising significantly in popularity. • Compared to previous study waves, reported use of E-audiobooks has tended to level off, while accessing of the library’s E-local history or genealogy information has gradually been declining over the past 10 years. 59% 48% 34% 30% 24% 23% 22% 21% 40% 37% 27% 26% 43% 41% 39% 31% 36% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% E-books fiction E-books non-fiction Digital movies E-audiobooks E-local history or genealogy information Digital music E-newspapers or journal articles* E-magazines 2015 2010 2005 Specific Types of Electronic Resources Used on Library’s Website Q.8a/b Base: All respondents (2005 - 1102; 2010 - 1100; 2015 - 600); those who accessed electronic materials on library’s web page (2005 - 62; 2010 - 134; 2015 - 86). *Wording changed in 2015 from “E-periodicals, E-newspapers or journal articles”. Accessed Materials via the Library’s Website
  50. 50. Market Probe 50 Ways Users Access the Public Library Q.2/3/4 Base: Library users (2010 - 757; 2015 - 417). 37% 1% 1% 13% 12% In-Person Internet Phone 33% 2% • The diagrams below depict all past-year library users according to their reported methods of accessing the library. • While in-person only visitors constituted the largest group of library users in 2010, they have been outnumbered by combined in-person/Internet users in 2015. • The proportion of library patrons using all three access methods has also increased over the last five years, while the total percentage visiting the library in person remains extremely high, at 94%. 27% 1% 1% 20% 11% In-Person Internet Phone 36% 3% 2015 2010
  51. 51. Market Probe 51 Past Year Public Library Interaction Through Social Media Q.4c Base: All respondents (2015 - 600). New question in 2015. • Only 7% of the general public claims to have interacted with the public library through social media in the past year. This figure tends to double among younger adults and those with children in the home (as well as among frequent in- person visitors and those who access the library by Internet). In-Person Library Use None 3% 1-10 times 7% 11+ times 13% Access Library by Internet Yes 13% No 3% Age 18-24 14% 25-34 14% 35-54 6% 55+ 4% Children in Home Yes 13% No 5% 7%92% 2015 Yes No
  52. 52. Market Probe 52 49% 26% 22% 8% 50% 31% 23% 8% 47% 27% 19% 7% 51% 24% 17% 9% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Children Spouse/partner Others Past Year Use of Public Library by Other Household Members Q.5a/b Base: All respondents (2000 - 1007; 2005 - 1102; 2010 - 1100; 2015 - 600). Used by Others (net) • After rising in 2010, the reported incidence of children using the public library has declined significantly in 2015 (although some of the reason for this could be due to slight wave-over-wave changes in household composition). • Family usage of the library increases with education level and is more prevalent among medium and higher income households. 68% 32% 65% 35% 65% 35% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Yes No 2015 2010 2005 2000 Cardholder Yes 55% No 31% In-Person Library Use None 24% 1-10 times 58% 11+ times 66% Bookstore Use None 30% Any 53% Library vs. Bookstore Usage More 63% Same 64% Less 40% Access Library by Phone / Text Yes 62% No 45% Access Library by Internet Yes 69% No 34% Library Benefits Top 53% Middle 51% Bottom 34% Age 18-24 51% 25-34 64% 35-54 54% 55+ 36% Children in Home Yes 75% No 36% Education High school 40% Univ/college 52% Grad school 62% Income <$35K 28% $35K - <$75K 52% $75K+ 59%
  53. 53. Market Probe 53 Total Usage of the Public Library No One 21% Other Household Member(s) Only 10% With Others in Household 41% Respondent Only 28% Q.2/3/4 Base: All respondents (2010 - 1100; 2015 - 600). Total Users = 69% • Taking the total population into account and comparing with 2010, the most notable differences in usage are a slight increase in library non-user households and a corresponding decrease in households where the respondent didn’t use the library but others in the household did. • As was the case five years ago, over three-quarters of Ontario households are using the public library, and the majority of households that are using the library contain more than one user. No One 24% Other Household Member(s) Only 7% With Others in Household 42% Respondent Only 27% Total Users = 70% 2015 2010
  54. 54. Market Probe 54 84% 56% 34% 28% 26% 25% 23% 23% 16% 14% 10% 90% 70% 41% 33% 26% 17% 33% 23% 13% 21% 16% 88% 73% 38% 31% 32% 18% 9% 21% 16% 88% 77% 47% 19% 32% 17% 9% 24% 18% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%Q.6a/b Base: Those who personally visited the public library (2000 - 678; 2005 - 713; 2010 - 723; 2015 - 394); households where anyone used the public library (2010 - 843; 2015 - 444). *Wording changed in 2015 from “Access electronic databases.” Reasons for Personally Using the Public Library • Many of the more traditional reasons for using libraries were less often cited versus five years ago, with only the library’s wireless network generating more traffic. Given that this was a multiple mention question, it may be that today’s library users are becoming more selective in determining which library services they choose to use. Borrow books, CDs, DVDs or other materials Get information on a topic of personal interest Read or study Access the Internet using library computers Relax or socialize Use the library's wireless network Access databases / other electronically stored info* Take a child to a program or activity Attend a lecture, program, meeting or training session Work assignment or keep up-to- date at work School or class assignment 86% 59% 44% 35% 31% 31% 27% 25% 18% 21% 27% Total Household (2015) 68% 32% 65% 35% 65% 35% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Yes No 2015 2010 2005 2000
  55. 55. Market Probe 55 Reasons for Personally Using the Public Library by Frequency of Library Use (Current Year) Q.6a Base: Frequent library users (2015 - 161); infrequent users (2015 - 233). 93% 65% 37% 35% 31% 31% 29% 26% 21% 7% 14% 78% 50% 33% 24% 22% 21% 18% 21% 13% 12% 15% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Borrow books, CDs, DVDs or other materials Get information on a topic of personal interest Read or study Access the Internet using library computers Relax or socialize Use the library's wireless network Access databases / other electronically stored info Take a child to a program or activity Attend a lecture, program, meeting or training session School or class assignment Work assignment or keep up-to-date at work More than 10 past year in-person visits 1 to 10 past year in-person visits • In 2015, more frequent visits to the library were associated with borrowing materials, gathering information on topics of interest, Internet/wireless/database access, and participation in library programs.
  56. 56. Market Probe USE OF ALTERNATIVE INFORMATION CHANNELS Market Probe
  57. 57. Market Probe 57 6% 5% 3% 3% 4% 4% 1% 11% 4% 1% 5% 7% 4% 2% 2% 6% 7% 2% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Due to illness / injury / too old No reason / don't know Prefer to buy / share books Library hours not convenient Have own library / books Total Reasons for Not Using the Public Library in the Past Year Q.9a/b Base: Past-year public library non-users (2000 - 326; 2005 - 389; 2010 - 343; 2015 - 183). Note: Mentions of 3% or more only. May total more than 100%, due to multiple mentions. Have Internet Access Yes 57% No 26% Bookstore Use None 25% Any 58% Books Read in Past Year None 38% 1-5 52% 6-15 66% 16+ 56% Education High school 33% Univ/college 62% Grad school 56% Income <$35K 39% $35K - <$75K 43% $75K+ 65% Community Size <30K 40% 35K - <500K 41% 500K+ 62% • Availability of information from other sources has become the primary reason for not using the public library, with Internet and bookstore usage strongly linked to this explanation. • Those with higher education and higher incomes are also more apt to offer this rationale for non-use. 50% 30% 21% 8% 7% 6% 40% 34% 27% 9% 10% 6% 21% 25% 26% 7% 3% 6% 22% 30% 21% 12% 8% 6% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Get information from other sources Not interested Too busy Don't read Library isn't accessible Use library at school or work 68% 32% 65% 35% 65% 35% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Yes No 2015 2010 2005 2000
  58. 58. Market Probe 58 Experience Using the Library Q.9d/e/f Base: Past-year non-users of library (191); All users of library (586); Had a negative library experience (32). New questions in 2015. • Over 90% of those who haven’t used the public library in the past year have done so sometime in the past. • Relatively few Ontarians who have ever used the public library claim to have had a negative experience when doing so. For the few who did, fines, materials not being available, and unhelpful staff were the main complaints. Type of Negative Experience Materials / books not available 16% I owe penalty fees 16% Staff aren’t friendly / helpful 13% It’s overcrowded 9% Have to pay access fee to services 6% Not enough computers 6% Difficulties with computers / forgot pin # 6% Poor hours 3% Materials / books are damaged / ripped 3% Other 16% 91%9% Yes (%) No (%) Ever used the public library Had a negative experience 5%95% Yes (%) No (%) Bookstore Use None 81% Any 94% Gender Male 86% Female 96%
  59. 59. Market Probe 59 87% 83% 44% 42% 41% 23% 17% 88% 83% 50% 23% 26% 21% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% At home At work At other places in the community using a smartphone At other places in the community using wireless access At your public library At school 2015 2010 Ways Internet Was Accessed in the Past Year Q.10 Base: All respondents (2010 - 1100; 2015 - 600). Change of wording in 2010 makes comparisons to earlier data invalid. Any access • Incidence of having Internet access, in general and in the home, has remained constant during the last five years, with access at work and at school declining somewhat. • Over this same time period, wireless access has shown a substantial increase. • Respondents under the age of 25 are one of the library’s biggest Internet user groups. Cardholder Yes 29% No 6% In-Person Library Use None 4% 1-10 times 29% 11+ times 38% Access Library by Phone / Text Yes 32% No 20% Social Media Interaction with Library Yes 41% No 21% Bookstore Use None 15% Any 24% Books Read in Past Year None 11% 1-5 20% 6-15 28% 16+ 26% Library vs. Bookstore Usage More 34% Same 38% Less 11% Library Benefits Top 26% Middle 23% Bottom 15% Future Importance of Library More 29% Same 23% Less 19% Age 18-24 38% 25-34 23% 35-54 23% 55+ 17% Children in Home Yes 19% No 30% Region North 11% East 22% Southwest 24% Metro T.O. 29% GTA Urban 25% GTA Ex-urban 19%
  60. 60. Market Probe 60 • With the exception of social networking, which has seen a significant increase, the ways in which the Internet is used haven’t changed much over the last five years. 85% 84% 75% 65% 55% 42% 42% 32% 16% 86% 84% 78% 43% 18% 82% 78% 75% 67% 63% 57% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Search for specific information of interest Use e-mail, a chat room or IM To access the news To access social networking sites To stream movies, music or other types of entertainment To download movies, music or other types of entertainment To download books or magazines* To create content Use of Internet Q.11 Base: All respondents (2000 - 1007; 2005 - 1102; 2010 - 1100; 2015 - 600). *Change of wording in 2015 makes comparisons to earlier data invalid. Regular Use of Internet Children in Home Yes 95% No 80% Education High School 64% Univ/college 93% Grad school 98% Income <$35K 62% $35K - <$75K 83% $75K+ 97% Community Size <30K 77% 30K - <500K 82% 500K+ 90% Region North 80% East 87% Southwest 74% Metro T.O. 88% GTA Urban 93% GTA Ex-urban 88% In-Person Library Use None 78% Any 89% Access Library by Internet Yes 95% No 78% Social Media Interaction with Library Yes 93% No 85% Future Importance of Library More 83% Same 86% Less 91% Library Benefits Top 81% Middle 87% Bottom 91% Age 18-24 97% 25-34 95% 35-54 91% 55+ 71% 68% 32% 65% 35% 65% 35% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Yes No 2015 2010 2005 2000 Age 18-24 73% 25-34 72% 35-54 56% 55+ 40%
  61. 61. Market Probe 61 Books Read in the Past Year Q.13f Base: All respondents (2015 - 600). New question in 2015. • The vast majority of Ontarians claim to have read one or more books during the past year, with the largest group reading 16 or more. • Older people tend to be more avid readers than the younger age groups. 85% 40% 24% 21% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 16+ books read 6 to 15 books read 1 to 5 books read 2015 Any Books Read In-Person Library Use None 24% 1-10 times 33% 11+ times 70% Social Media Interaction with Library Yes 64% No 38% Library vs Bookstore Usage More 63% Same 39% Less 33% Library Benefits Top 53% Middle 34% Bottom 23% Age 18-24 24% 25-34 35% 35-54 40% 55+ 47% Education High school 33% Univ/college 40% Grad school 55% Born in Canada Yes 38% No 49% Region North 38% East 43% Southwest 43% Metro T.O. 45% GTA Urban 31% GTA Ex-urban 39%
  62. 62. Market Probe 62 Format of Books Read in the Past Year Q.13g Base: Read any books in the past year (2015 - 507). New question in 2015. • Hard copy books remain the most popular format. • Those who prefer E-books are more likely to be bookstore users and to have not visited the public library in person in the past year. 11% 74% 14% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Mostly in electronic format Mostly in hard copy Both equally 2015 In-Person Library Use None 20% Any 8% Library vs Bookstore Usage More 8% Same 8% Less 16% Bookstore Use None 5% Any 12% Age 18-24 10% 25-34 6% 35-54 11% 55+ 13% Education High school 9% Univ/college 10% Grad school 21% Region North 13% East 11% Southwest 7% Metro T.O. 12% GTA Urban 16% GTA Ex-urban 5%
  63. 63. Market Probe 63 Cardholder Yes 28% No 20% In-Person Library Use None 19% 1-10 times 24% 11+ times 37% Books Read in Past Year None 6% 1-5 13% 6-15 23% 16+ 42% Library vs. Bookstore Usage More 23% Same 32% Less 38% Library Benefits Top 32% Middle 22% Bottom 25% • Bookstore usage has remained quite consistent since 2005. • As was the case five years ago, frequent bookstore usage is associated with higher usage of, and support for, the public library system. Past Year Bookstore Visit Frequency Q.14a Base: All respondents (2000 - 1007; 2005 - 1102; 2010 - 1100; 2015 - 600). 26% 21% 37% 17% 25% 21% 38% 16% 27% 22% 34% 16% 34% 22% 31% 12% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% More than 10 times 6 to 10 times 1 to 5 times None 68% 32% 65% 35% 65% 35% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Yes No 2015 2010 2005 2000 Education High school 13% Univ/college 28% Grad school 58% Income <$35K 16% $35K - <$75K 24% $75K+ 34% Community Size <30K 20% 30K - <500K 22% 500K+ 32% Region North 18% East 30% Southwest 14% Metro T.O. 40% GTA Urban 26% GTA Ex-urban 30%
  64. 64. Market Probe 64 42% 26% 29% 3% 43% 28% 28% 1% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Bookstores more About the same Libraries more Don't know 2015 2010 Frequency of Visiting Bookstore vs. Library Q.14b Base: Past-year bookstore users (2010 - 921, 2015 - 501). Cardholder Yes 29% No 78% In-Person Library Use None 77% 1-10 times 37% 11+ times 7% Future Importance of Library More 31% Same 39% Less 55% Library Benefits Top 26% Middle 44% Bottom 74% • Over half of Ontario’s bookstore users say they are using libraries as much or more than bookstores. • Those who use bookstores more tend to not only use, but also value, libraries less. Age 18-24 33% 25-34 52% 35-54 42% 55+ 39% Income <$35K 30% $35K - <$75K 38% $75K+ 50% Language English 43% French / Other 26% Region North 50% East 42% Southwest 30% Metro T.O. 42% GTA Urban 44% GTA Ex-urban 50%
  65. 65. ATTITUDES TOWARD THE PUBLIC LIBRARY Market Probe
  66. 66. Market Probe 66 Opinion of Future Importance of Public Libraries Q.15 Base: All respondents (2000 - 1007; 2005 - 1102; 2010 - 1100; 2015 - 600). Cardholder Yes 26% No 23% In-Person Library Use None 17% 1-10 times 27% 11+ times 36% Access Library by Phone / Text Yes 38% No 22% Access Library by Internet Yes 32% No 21% Bookstore Use None 25% 1-10 times 23% 11+ times 33% Library vs. Bookstore Usage More 32% Same 28% Less 19% Library Benefits Top 40% Middle 20% Bottom 5% Age 18-24 30% 25-34 21% 35-54 21% 55+ 32% Income <$35K 40% $35K - <$75K 21% $75K+ 26% Community Size <30K 24% 30K - <500K 21% 500K+ 30% Region North 18% East 28% Southwest 22% Metro T.O. 40% GTA Urban 20% GTA Ex-urban 27% • At the present time, equal numbers of Ontarians think libraries will become more important and less important as online availability of materials increases, with the largest group predicting that there will be no change. • Those who think the library will become more important tend to be either older or younger, have lower incomes, and live in Metro Toronto. 26% 43% 27% 5% 23% 44% 29% 4% 27% 45% 23% 6% 27% 41% 25% 7% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% More important No change Less important Don't know 2015 2010 2005 2000
  67. 67. Market Probe 67 • When asked theoretically about their local library closing, a large majority of respondents said that they would expect there to be a major impact on their community. • People in Southwest Ontario and those who use the library to access the Internet were among the groups most apt to feel this way, while young people tended to downplay the severity of the impact. Impact of Public Library Closing on Community Q.16a-a Base: All respondents (2015 - 600). New question in 2015. 71% 21% 2% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Major Impact Minor Impact No Impact at all 2015 Cardholder Yes 77% No 54% In-Person Library Use None 54% 1-10 times 75% 11+ times 86% Access Library by Phone / Text Yes 88% No 66% Have Internet Access None 73% Work 68% Home 71% School 69% Library 78% Other 69% Access Library by Internet Yes 82% No 63% Social Media Interaction with Library Yes 86% No 70% Bookstore Use None 66% 1-10 times 69% 11+ times 78% Age 18-24 56% 25-34 73% 35-54 69% 55+ 77% Region North 60% East 66% Southwest 78% Metro T.O. 72% GTA Urban 72% GTA Ex-urban 72%
  68. 68. Market Probe 68 Impact of Public Library Closing on Family Q.16a-b Base: All respondents (2015 - 600). New question in 2015. 44% 35% 21% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Major Impact Minor Impact No Impact at all 2015 Cardholder Yes 53% No 16% In-Person Library Use None 15% 1-10 times 40% 11+ times 84% Access Library by Phone / Text Yes 75% No 34% Access Library by Internet Yes 62% No 30% Social Media Interaction with Library Yes 61% No 42% Have Internet Access None 44% Work 42% Home 43% School 49% Library 64% Other 43% Bookstore Use None 38% 1-10 times 40% 11+ times 84% Gender Male 39% Female 47% Region North 35% East 41% Southwest 50% Metro T.O. 51% GTA Urban 41% GTA Ex-urban 39% • Asked to think about the effect their local library closing might have on themselves and their family, less than half felt that the impact would be major. • When presented in a personal context, women and Metro Toronto residents stood out along with some of the other groups who also thought the community as a whole would be very negatively impacted.
  69. 69. Market Probe 69 Benefit of Public Libraries Relative to Other Municipal Tax-Supported Services Q.16 Base: All respondents (2000 - 1007; 2005 - 1102; 2010 - 1100; 2015 - 600). Cardholder Yes 42% No 22% In-Person Library Use None 21% 1-10 times 34% 11+ times 57% Books Read in Past Year None 26% 1-5 26% 6-15 31% 16+ 48% Library vs Bookstore Usage More 54% Same 36% Less 23% Access Library by Phone / Text Yes 58% No 29% Have Internet Access None 48% Any 34% Access Library by Internet Yes 46% No 29% Future Importance of Libraries More 55% Same 34% Less 20% • There has been virtually no change over the past five years in how Ontarians view the library relative to other unspecified tax-supported services, with over three times as many respondents still saying the library belongs at the top rather than the bottom of the list. • The groups most likely to place the library at the top of the list include older residents, people without Internet access, lower income earners, immigrants and Torontonians. 36% 50% 11% 3% 37% 49% 11% 3% 25% 56% 16% 4% 22% 55% 20% 3% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Top of list Middle of list Bottom of list Don't know 2015 2010 2005 2000 Age 18-24 27% 25-34 31% 35-54 38% 55+ 40% Income <$35K 47% $35K - <$75K 41% $75K+ 33% Born in Canada Yes 34% No 45% Region North 31% East 34% Southwest 39% Metro T.O. 47% GTA Urban 31% GTA Ex-urban 34%
  70. 70. Market Probe 70 68 60 56 54 50 45 45 40 37 31 31 28 21 69 46 55 45 42 47 27 30 24 22 25 18 • In 2015, being a lender of materials is still the role of the library that is most valued by Ontarians, followed by early literacy programs, which is now much more valued than it was five years ago. • Several other services have also registered a significant increase in their perceived value but remain in the bottom half of the list. Perceived Value of Library Services Q.17 Base: All respondents (2010 - 1100; 2015 - 600). *Wording changed in 2015 from “Trainer in how to access information through computers”. 9 13 15 14 17 20 18 26 31 33 35 39 45 9 22 13 21 22 16 35 33 39 44 39 46 Lender of materials Early literacy programs Reference centre Provider of support for school projects or homework Place to study Local history collections Assistance in finding information Services to new Canadians Information for the unemployed Trainer in how to access info online* Focal point or meeting place Government services through library- based kiosks Resources for small business and entrepreneurs Bottom 6 Ratings (1-6 on a 10-pt. scale) Top 2 Ratings (9-10 on a 10-pt. scale)
  71. 71. Market Probe 71 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Value of Services by How Library Ranks Compared to Other Municipal Tax-Supported Services MeanScore • The chart below presents the average value scores of the different library services according to whether the library was placed at the top, middle or bottom of the list relative to other tax-supported services. • The maintaining of local history collections represents the narrowest gap in value perceptions across the three groups. 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 LenderofM aterialsReference Centre Assistance in Finding Info Place to Study Early Literacy Progam s LocalHistory Collections Inform ation forUnem ployed Services to New Canadians Training in H ow to Access Info G overnm entServices Kiosks M eeting Place Resources forSm allBusiness Library at Top of List Library in Middle of List Library at Bottom of List Q.16/17 Base: All respondents (2010 - 1100; 2015 - 600)
  72. 72. Market Probe 72 64% 45% 36% 26% 26% 25% 19% 13% 12% 9% 7% 6% 4% 72% 55% 49% 25% 35% 28% 15% 13% 14% 12% 10% 8% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Past Year Usage of Library Services by Someone in Household Q.18 Base: All respondents (2010 - 1100; 2015 - 600). *Wording change in 2015 from “Training in how to access information through computers”. • After being asked to rate the value of the services the library offers, respondents were then asked to indicate which of the services had been used by someone in their household during the past year. Despite the higher value perceptions measured in this year’s study, actual usage of most of the services has declined noticeably. Lender of materials Assistance in finding information Reference centre Focal point or meeting place Place to study Help with school projects or homework Local history collections Training in how to access information online* Early literacy programs Government services through library- based kiosks Information for the unemployed Resources for small business and entrepreneurs Services to new Canadians
  73. 73. Market Probe 73 Value & Usage Combined Q.17/18 Base: All respondents (2015 - 600). • For each of the library services, the diagram below plots perceived value (percent giving the service a score of 9 or 10 on the 10-point value scale) along with reported usage. • Value perceptions and reported usage are most aligned for being a lender of materials, providing assistance in finding information, and serving as a focal point or meeting place. • The widest value/usage gap is for early literacy programs, which was also the case in 2010. 0 40 80 Assistance in finding information Early literacy programs Focal point or meeting place Government services through library-based kiosks Information for the unemployed Provider of support for school Reference centre Resources for small business and entrepreneurs Services to new Canadians Training in how to access info online Percent Valuing the Service Percent Using the Service 0 40 80 Assistance in Finding Information Early Literacy Progams Focal Point or Meeting Place Government Services Kiosks Information for the Unemployed Lender of Materials Local History CollectionsPlace to Study Reference Centre Resources for Small Business Services to New Canadians Support for School Projects or Homework Training in How to Access Info Online
  74. 74. Market Probe 74 Information Technology Training that Could Be Offered Q.13b Base: All respondents (2015 - 600). *Change of question wording in 2015 makes comparisons to earlier data invalid. Note: Table contains mentions of 3% or more. May total more than 100%, due to multiple mentions. • Responses to an open-ended question in 2015 reveal that nearly one-third of Ontario adults think the public library should offer general computer or Internet skills training. Others, in response to this question, identified who they thought the most appropriate target audiences for IT training would be. • A substantial number of respondents provided no suggestions regarding the type of technical training the library could provide. 30% 9% 9% 6% 5% 4% 3% 3% 3% 3% 4% 42% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 2015* Computer / Internet skills Already do a good job For seniors / older people For kids / students How to access library resources Social networking Anything / anything useful Word processing / Excel / PowerPoint Hobbies / special interests Research skills Other Don't know / can't think of anything
  75. 75. Market Probe 75 Believability of Positioning Statements Q.19 Base: All respondents (2010 - 1100; 2015 - 600). • Compared to 2010, there is stronger agreement that the public library is the only affordable place where the average Ontarian can go for information and less disagreement that the public library is the best place for people of all ages to go to pursue lifelong learning. 47 39 42 36 25 24 28 33 The public library is the only affordable place where the average Ontarian can go for information The public library is the best place for people of all ages to go to pursue lifelong learning Bottom 6 Ratings (1-6 on a 10-pt. scale) Top 2 Ratings (9-10 on a 10-pt. scale)
  76. 76. DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE OF RESPONDENTS Market Probe
  77. 77. Market Probe 77 Q.A/B Base: All respondents (2000 - 1007; 2005 - 1102; 2010 - 1100; 2015 - 600). Respondent Age / Gender Respondent Age Gender 12% 16% 38% 35% 0% 12% 16% 40% 32% 0% 12% 19% 38% 27% 4% 12% 19% 38% 27% 4% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 18 to 24 25 to 34 35 to 54 55+ Refused 68% 32% 65% 35% 65% 35% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Yes No 2015 2010 2005 2000 Average Age 2015: 46 2010: 46 2005: 45 2000: 44 48% 52% 48% 52% 37% 63% 37% 63% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Male Female • Quotas placed on age and gender ensured that this year’s sample resembled that of 2010 on those two dimensions.
  78. 78. Market Probe 78 40% 12% 15% 11% 8% 35% 13% 15% 14% 11% 40% 18% 15% 11% 10% 36% 16% 15% 13% 10% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 5 or younger 6 to 10 11 to 14 15 to 17 Number in Household / Presence of Children in Household Q.20/21a/b Base: All respondents (2000 - 1007; 2005 - 1102; 2010 - 1100; 2015 - 600). Any Children Number in Household Presence of Children in Household 16% 34% 48% 3% 13% 35% 50% 2% 12% 32% 54% 2% 15% 33% 50% 2% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% One Two Three or more Refused Average Number 2015: 2.8 2010: 2.9 2005: 2.9 2000: 2.8 68% 32% 65% 35% 65% 35% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Yes No 2015 2010 2005 2000 • Households in the 2015 study were slightly smaller than in the previous two study waves.
  79. 79. Market Probe 79 28% 1% 27% 70% 15% 45% 10% 25% 2% 24% 73% 18% 44% 11% 29% 2% 27% 69% 19% 41% 8% 35% 2% 32% 64% 20% 36% 7% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Elementary school Some / completed high school Some univ/college Graduated univ/college Post graduate studies Education / Total Annual Household Income Q.22/24 Base: All respondents (2000 - 1007; 2005 - 1102; 2010 - 1100; 2015 - 600). High School or Less University/ College Education Total Annual Household Income 14% 27% 35% 25% 12% 31% 35% 22% 15% 29% 22% 34% 17% 36% 21% 26% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Under $35K $35 < $75K $75K+ Don't know / refused 68% 32% 65% 35% 65% 35% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Yes No 2015 2010 2005 2000 • There were no significant differences in education or income levels compared with 2010.
  80. 80. Market Probe 80 Ontario Region / Community Size Base: All respondents (2000 - 1007; 2005 - 1102; 2010 - 1100; 2015 - 600). Community SizeOntario Region 23% 22% 19% 16% 11% 9% 19% 23% 20% 17% 12% 8% 17% 27% 19% 17% 12% 8% 17% 23% 20% 19% 13% 8% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% GTA Urban Southwestern Eastern Metro Toronto GTA Ex-urban Northern 17% 36% 48% 17% 35% 48% 17% 40% 44% 19% 33% 47% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Under 30K 30K < 500K 500K+ 68% 32% 65% 35% 65% 35% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Yes No 2015 2010 2005 2000 • Community size was very consistent with the distribution from the 2010 study, but there were slightly more people residing in urban parts of the GTA this year.
  81. 81. Market Probe 81 Aboriginal Status / Years in Canada / Language Spoken Q.22a/b/c/23 Base: All respondents (2000 - 1007; 2005 - 1102; 2010 - 1100; 2015 – 600); Respondents who were not born in Canada (111). “Born in Canada”, “Years Lived in Canada” and “Aboriginal Status” are new in 2015. 94% 1% 5% 86% 3% 10% 87% 3% 9% 88% 4% 8% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% English French Other Primary Language Spoken at HomeBorn in Canada 3% 5% 5% 86% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 2 years or less 3 to 5 years 6 to 10 years More than 10 years Years Lived in Canada 68% 32% 65% 35% 65% 35% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Yes No 2015 2010 2005 2000 81% 19% Yes No Aboriginal Status 4% 95% Yes No • More English-speaking people completed the phone survey compared with the previous studies, and the vast majority of respondents in 2015 were longtime residents of Canada.
  82. 82. Market Probe 82 Challenges in Using the Library Q.23a Base: All respondents (2015 - 600). New questions in 2015. 8% 7% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% That make reading difficult or challenging That make visiting a library in person difficult or challenging Have Physical or Health Conditions… • About equal numbers of Ontarians have physical or health conditions that make reading difficult as have conditions that make visiting the library in person a challenge.
  83. 83. Market Probe RESULTS FROM THE ONLINE SURVEY Market Probe
  84. 84. Market Probe USE OF THE PUBLIC LIBRARY Market Probe
  85. 85. Market Probe 85 Characteristics of Closest Public Library Q.1a/b Base: All respondents (1102). Condition of Library Distance from Home 70% 20% 5% 1% 4% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 5 kilometres or less 6 to 10 kilometres 11 to 20 kilometres More than 20 kilometres Don’t know 56% 28% 2% 13% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Inviting space Okay, but could use some improvement Not pleasant Never been inside library • Most of those who responded to the web survey live within 5 kilometres of their local library and find it to be an inviting place. Cardholder Yes 75% No 61% In-Person Library Use None 62% 1-10 times 71% 11+ times 81% Access Library by Internet Yes 75% No 65% Library Benefits Top 78% Middle 68% Bottom 61% Community Size <30K 56% 30K - <500K 67% 500K+ 74% Region North 64% East 66% Southwest 66% Metro T.O. 80% GTA Urban 71% GTA Ex-urban 66%
  86. 86. Market Probe 86 Library Cardholders Q.1 Base: All respondents (1102). • Internet research panel members were less likely to report having a library card than those surveyed by phone. • Certain demographic groups were more likely to be cardholders than others: younger people, women, those with children in the household, people born outside Canada, and those who reside in Metro Toronto or the GTA. In-Person Library Use None 30% 1-10 times 79% 11+ times 99% Books Read in Past Year None 38% 1-5 63% 6-15 76% 16+ 80% In-Person Bookstore Use None 51% 1-10 times 71% 11+ times 72% Online Book Vendor Use None 59% 1-10 times 71% 11+ times 72% Access Library by Phone / Text Yes 89% No 62% Access Library by Internet Yes 88% No 41% Social Media Interaction with Library Yes 86% No 66% Library Benefits Top 84% Middle 62% Bottom 48% Gender Male 63% Female 72% Age 18-24 75% 25-34 69% 35-54 67% 55+ 65% Children in Home Yes 79% No 64% Education High school 55% Univ/college 67% Grad school 81% Born in Canada Yes 66% No 73% Region North 60% East 61% Southwest 64% Metro T.O. 69% GTA Urban 73% GTA Ex-urban 70% 68%31% Yes No
  87. 87. Market Probe 87 Past Year In-Person Use of Public Library Q.2 Base: All respondents (1102). • Despite the lower incidence of cardholders, the percentage of in-person library users was similar to the results of the phone survey. • Those living close to a library and in the more densely populated parts of the Toronto area were most apt to report visiting the library in person in the past year. Cardholder Yes 86% No 31% Books Read in Past Year None 23% 1-5 69% 6-15 79% 16+ 82% In-Person Bookstore Use None 49% 1-10 times 73% 11+ times 75% Online Book Vendor Use None 58% 1-10 times 75% 11+ times 69% Access Library by Phone / Text Yes 97% No 62% Have Internet Access None 36% Work 70% Home 69% School 75% Library 98% Other 71% Access Library by Internet Yes 93% No 37% Social Media Interaction with Library Yes 94% No 67% Library Benefits Top 86% Middle 66% Bottom 34% Children in Home Yes 82% No 65% Education High school 54% Univ/college 70% Grad school 76% Born in Canada Yes 66% No 78% Distance to Closest Public Library <5 km 72% 6-10 km 69% 11+ km 52% Region North 64% East 63% Southwest 68% Metro T.O. 70% GTA Urban 74% GTA Ex-urban 64% 69%31% Yes No
  88. 88. Market Probe 88 16% 14% 17% 53% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 21+ times 11 to 20 times 6 to 10 times 1 to 5 times Past Year Public Library In-Person Visit Frequency Q.2 Base: Past-year public library visitors (757). • Web research panelists reported fewer in-person visits to the library than their phone survey counterparts. • Numbers of visits were very different at both the upper (21+ times) and lower (1 to 5 times) ends of the scale, while in the middle the results were very consistent with the responses obtained by phone. • Older people and those with lower incomes tended to be the most frequent past-year visitors, as well as those having close proximity to the library. Cardholder Yes 19% No 2% Books Read in Past Year None 6% 1-5 5% 6-15 13% 16+ 32% Access Library by Phone / Text Yes 26% No 12% Have Internet Access Work 15% Home 16% School 7% Library 23% Other 14% Access Library by Internet Yes 20% No 3% Social Media Interaction with Library Yes 26% No 15% Library Benefits Top 28% Middle 9% Bottom 0% Age 18-24 3% 25-34 13% 35-54 16% 55+ 22% Income <$35K 18% $35K - <$75K 19% $75K+ 12% Distance to Closest Public Library <5 km 18% 6-10 km 13% 11+ km 9% Region North 16% East 12% Southwest 17% Metro T.O. 22% GTA Urban 14% GTA Ex-urban 13%
  89. 89. Market Probe 89 20% 9% 9% 6% 5% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Consult a librarian Renew an item Reserve an item Enquire / request changes to account Past Year Use of Public Library by Telephone / Text Q.4/7 Base: All respondents (1102). Telephone / Text • Overall, the proportion of the Ontario adult population accessing the public library by phone or text is comparable to the results from the phone survey; however, with the exception of account requests/changes, web panelists were less likely to indicate the specific types of activities they conducted by phone. Cardholder Yes 26% No 6% In-Person Library Use None 2% 1-10 times 23% 11+ times 39% Books Read in Past Year None 2% 1-5 16% 6-15 25% 16+ 27% In-Person Bookstore Use None 12% 1-10 times 22% 11+ times 19% Online Book Vendor Use None 15% 1-10 times 22% 11+ times 19% Have Internet Access None 9% Work 20% Home 19% School 23% Library 35% Other 19% Access Library by Internet Yes 30% No 6% Social Media Interaction with Library Yes 49% No 17% Library Benefits Top 28% Middle 17% Bottom 6% Age 18-24 20% 25-34 15% 35-54 23% 55+ 18% Children in Home Yes 27% No 17% Education High school 13% Univ/college 20% Grad school 21% Born in Canada Yes 17% No 26% Telephone = 19% Text = 3%
  90. 90. Market Probe 90 20% 37% 43% 11 or more times 1 to 10 times Not at all Past Year Use of Public Library’s Website Times Accessed Library’s Website in Past Year Q.3 Base: All respondents (1102). Any Access of Library’s Website • Not surprisingly, there are fewer web panelists than phone respondents who have not made any use of the library’s website in the past year. • However, the percentage of frequent users (11 or more times) does not differ significantly across the two survey populations. Cardholder Yes 74% No 20% In-Person Library Use None 13% 1-10 times 69% 11+ times 95% Books Read in Past Year None 16% 1-5 51% 6-15 66% 16+ 76% Online Book Vendor Use None 41% 1-10 times 63% 11+ times 64% Have Internet Access None 27% Work 57% Home 56% School 62% Library 85% Other 59% Access Library by Phone / Text Yes 87% No 49% Social Media Interaction with Library Yes 90% No 53% Library Benefits Top 74% Middle 53% Bottom 23% Gender Male 53% Female 60% Children in Home Yes 67% No 54% Education High school 41% Univ/college 57% Grad school 66% Born in Canada Yes 55% No 63% Region North 54% East 49% Southwest 54% Metro T.O. 62% GTA Urban 60% GTA Ex-urban 55%
  91. 91. Market Probe 91 57% 35% 29% 26% 14% 12% 9% 5% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Check catalogue Reserve an item Renew an item Download an item Access other materials via library's website Manage / make changes to library account Consult a librarian by e-mail, chat or IM Past Year Use of Public Library by Internet Q.3/8a Base: All respondents (1102). Internet • Web panel respondents were more apt than phone respondents to report using the library’s website to check catalogues. • For all other uses of the website, the percentages generally lined up with those of the telephone interviewees.
  92. 92. Market Probe 92 41%59% Yes No 39% 28% 15% 14% 14% 9% 8% 6% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% E-books fiction E-books non-fiction Digital movies E-newspapers or journal articles E-magazines E-audiobooks Digital music E-local history or genealogy information Specific Types of Electronic Resources Used on Library’s Website Q.8a/b Base: All respondents (1102); those who checked the library’s online catalogue, downloaded an item, or accessed other electronic materials on the library’s web page (449). Checked the Library’s Online Catalogue, Downloaded an Item, or Accessed Other Materials via the Library’s Website • More web survey respondents than phone respondents said that they had checked the library’s online catalogue, downloaded an item or accessed other materials via the library’s website. • When this larger base size is taken into account, the proportion of the total population accessing the different electronic media is almost identical for the two populations that were surveyed.
  93. 93. Market Probe 93 Ways Users Access the Public Library Q.2/3/4a/b Base: Library users (804). • Higher library website usage on the part of panel respondents has made the cross-channel usage diagram below look different from the one produced for telephone respondents. • In particular, this diagram shows more combined in-person/Internet users and fewer combined in-person/telephone and in-person-only users. • The proportion of library patrons who reported using all three access methods, however, was not significantly impacted by survey method. 19% 0% 0% 23% 3% In-Person Internet Phone 49% 5%
  94. 94. Market Probe 94 Past Year Public Library Interaction Through Social Media Q.4c Base: All respondents (1102). • Interacting with the library through social media is only slightly higher for the population surveyed by web versus phone and, once again, skews to the younger part of the population. 9%91% Yes No Cardholder Yes 11% No 4% In-Person Library Use None 2% 1-10 times 11% 11+ times 14% Books Read in Past Year None 1% 1-5 8% 6-15 11% 16+ 11% In-Person Bookstore Use None 3% 1-10 times 9% 11+ times 16% Online Book Vendor Use None 3% 1-10 times 11% 11+ times 12% Access Library by Phone / Text Yes 21% No 5% Have Internet Access None 9% Work 10% Home 8% School 12% Library 16% Other 10% Access Library by Internet Yes 14% No 2% Library Benefits Top 10% Middle 9% Bottom 4% Age 18-24 11% 25-34 12% 35-54 9% 55+ 5% Children in Home Yes 13% No 7%
  95. 95. Market Probe 95 45% 27% 19% 9% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Spouse/partner Children Others Past Year Use of Public Library by Other Household Members Q.5a/b Base: All respondents (1102). Used by Others (net) • Even though the percentage of respondents reporting that others in their household used the public library resembled the figure reported in the telephone survey, the relationship of those people to the respondent was quite different, with web respondents mentioning spouses/partners more frequently than children. Cardholder Yes 55% No 23% In-Person Library Use None 15% 1-10 times 55% 11+ times 70% Books Read in Past Year None 19% 1-5 44% 6-15 54% 16+ 51% In-Person Bookstore Use None 29% 1-10 times 49% 11+ times 53% Access Library by Phone / Text Yes 65% No 41% Access Library by Internet Yes 60% No 26% Social Media Interaction with Library Yes 76% No 42% Library Benefits Top 58% Middle 43% Bottom 19% Age 18-24 50% 25-34 46% 35-54 50% 55+ 39% Children in Home Yes 70% No 38% Education High school 37% Univ/college 46% Grad school 49% Income <$35K 25% $35K - <$75K 44% $75K+ 50% Region North 40% East 44% Southwest 42% Metro T.O. 39% GTA Urban 53% GTA Ex-urban 47%
  96. 96. Market Probe 96 Total Usage of the Public Library Q.2/3/4a/b Base: All respondents (1102). • The breakout of library usage at a household level was quite consistent across the two populations surveyed. • The only significant difference is fewer web panelists reported that other household members used the library in the past year when they themselves did not. This was at least in part due to the fact that web panelists came from smaller households with fewer children compared with those interviewed by phone. No One 24% Other Household Member(s) Only 3% With Others in Household 45% Respondent Only 28% Total Users = 73%
  97. 97. Market Probe 97 68% 34% 31% 24% 22% 20% 15% 14% 12% 10% 9% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%Q.6a/b Base: Those who personally visited the public library (757); households where anyone used the public library (808). Reasons for Personally Using the Public Library • At both an individual and household level, web panelists gave fewer reasons for using the public library than telephone respondents. The ordering of the reasons turned out to be similar except that online respondents placed use of the library’s wireless network higher on the list and relaxing/socializing lower. Borrow books, CDs, DVDs or other materials Read or study Get information on a topic of personal interest Use the library's wireless network Access the Internet using library computers Access databases / other electronically stored info Relax or socialize Take a child to a program or activity Attend a lecture, program, meeting or training session Work assignment or keep up-to- date at work School or class assignment 75% 41% 33% 28% 28% 23% 19% 19% 14% 16% 20% Total Household
  98. 98. Market Probe 98 90% 46% 43% 32% 31% 30% 22% 21% 18% 11% 11% 58% 24% 31% 20% 15% 19% 8% 12% 12% 9% 10% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Borrow books, CDs, DVDs or other materials Get information on a topic of personal interest Read or study Use the library's wireless network Access databases / other electronically stored info Access the Internet using library computers Attend a lecture, program, meeting or training session Relax or socialize Take a child to a program or activity School or class assignment Work assignment or keep up-to-date at work More than 10 past year in-person visits 1 to 10 past year in-person visits Reasons for Personally Using the Public Library by Frequency of Library Use Q.6a Base: Frequent library users (225); infrequent users (532). • Based on responses to the online survey, frequent in-person visitors to the library made more use of all library services than those who didn’t visit as frequently, and in most cases, the differences were significant.
  99. 99. Market Probe USE OF ALTERNATIVE INFORMATION CHANNELS Market Probe
  100. 100. Market Probe 100 43% 28% 18% 16% 12% 6% 5% 5% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Not interested Get information from other sources Prefer to buy / share books Too busy Don't read Library services / materials aren't suitable / satisfactory Library isn't accessible Have own library / books Total Reasons for Not Using the Public Library in the Past Year Q.9a/b Base: Past-year public library non-users (298). Note: Mentions of 3% or more only. May total more than 100%, due to multiple mentions. • For web respondents, the most frequently cited reason for not using the public library was that they were simply not interested, whereas phone survey participants were more apt to say they get information from other sources. • Lack of interest is high among those with lower incomes and those who don’t read books. Books Read in Past Year None 54% 1-5 39% 6-15 36% 16+ 36% Library Benefits Top 29% Middle 42% Bottom 54% Income <$35K 60% $35K - <$75K 37% $75K+ 45% Community Size <30K 23% 30K - <500K 48% 500K+ 45% Region North 21% East 39% Southwest 56% Metro T.O. 39% GTA Urban 56% GTA Ex-urban 16%
  101. 101. Market Probe 101 Experience Using the Library • Similar percentages of library non-users from the telephone and web surveys said they had ever used the public library, but the proportion of all past and current users who had a negative experience was twice as high for the online group. • For web survey takers, the most common complaint had to do with unfriendly or unhelpful library staff. Type of Negative Experience Staff aren’t friendly / helpful 21% Materials / books not available 14% It’s noisy / people are disruptive 14% Terrible return system / books returned but still fined late fees 13% Difficulties with computers / forgot pin # 6% Materials / books are damaged / ripped 6% Poor security 4% Difficulty getting card 3% I owe penalty fees 2% It’s overcrowded 2% Fine / fees are too high 2% Rooms aren't available 2% Other 12% 89%11% Yes (%) No (%) Ever used the public library Had a negative experience 10%90% Yes (%) No (%) Children in Home Yes 97% No 88% Income <$35K 73% $35K - <$75K 88% $75K+ 96% Born in Canada Yes 92% No 78% Books Read in Past Year None 85% 1-5 95% 6-15 89% 16+ 89% In-Person Bookstore Use None 80% 1-10 times 95% 11+ times 89% Library Benefits Top 88% Middle 93% Bottom 82% Q.9d/e/f Base: Past-year non-users of library (298); All users of library (1070); Had a negative library experience (112).
  102. 102. Market Probe 102 • As might be expected, web panel members are more likely than phone respondents to have Internet access at home or at work. • They are no more likely, however, to access the Internet at other places around the community, including the library. • As was the case with the phone survey, those under the age of 25 form one of the library’s biggest Internet user groups. 99% 96% 59% 43% 40% 24% 15% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% At home At work At other places in the community using wireless access At other places in the community using a smartphone At your public library At school Ways Internet Was Accessed in the Past Year Q.10 Base: All respondents (1102). Any access Cardholder Yes 32% No 6% In-Person Library Use None 2% 1-10 times 28% 11+ times 48% Books Read in Past Year None 6% 1-5 25% 6-15 27% 16+ 29% Access Library by Phone / Text Yes 43% No 20% Access Library by Internet Yes 36% No 8% Social Media Interaction with Library Yes 46% No 22% Library Benefits Top 34% Middle 22% Bottom 7% Age 18-24 39% 25-34 29% 35-54 25% 55+ 16% Children in Home Yes 34% No 21% Education High school 18% Univ/college 24% Grad school 28% Region North 18% East 21% Southwest 19% Metro T.O. 25% GTA Urban 28% GTA Ex-urban 30%
  103. 103. Market Probe 103 99% 86% 84% 73% 56% 33% 24% 23% 6% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Search for specific information of interest Use e-mail, a chat room or IM To access the news To access social networking sites To stream movies, music or other types of entertainment To download movies, music or other types of entertainment To download books or magazines To create content Use of Internet Q.10/11 Base: All respondents (1102). Regular Use of Internet Age 18-24 70% 25-34 69% 35-54 58% 55+ 43% Age 18-24 15% 25-34 6% 35-54 5% 55+ 5% • Not surprisingly, pretty well all web respondents are regular users of the Internet. • Compared with telephone respondents who regularly use the Internet, web responders are more likely to access the news and use e-mail/chat/IM, but are less likely to stream or download items or create content.
  104. 104. Market Probe 104 Books Read in the Past Year Q.13f Base: All respondents (1102). • Web panelists tended to read fewer books in the past year than those who responded to the survey by phone, but the proportion of non-readers was consistent across the two populations. • Women and those over the age of 55 are among the heaviest readers of books. 86% 27% 28% 31% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 16+ books read 6 to 15 books read 1 to 5 books read Any Books Read Cardholder Yes 31% No 17% In-Person Library Use None 15% 1-10 times 22% 11+ times 56% In-Person Bookstore Use None 13% 1-10 times 25% 11+ times 58% Online Book Vendor Use None 18% 1-10 times 25% 11+ times 53% Access Library by Phone / Text Yes 36% No 24% Have Internet Access Work 25% Home 27% School 22% Library 32% Other 26% Access Library by Internet Yes 36% No 15% Library Benefits -u Top 38% Middle 23% Bottom 11% Gender Male 20% Female 33% Age 18-24 18% 25-34 18% 35-54 22% 55+ 38% Education High school 24% Univ/college 24% Grad school 38% Born in Canada Yes 28% No 22% Language English 27% French 32% Other 7% Region North 28% East 31% Southwest 31% Metro T.O. 27% GTA Urban 20% GTA Ex-urban 30%
  105. 105. Market Probe 105 Format of Books Read in the Past Year Q.13g Base: Read any books in the past year (946). • Those who completed the online survey were somewhat more inclined to read books in electronic format than those who completed the phone survey. • E-book usage was more common in Metro Toronto and urban portions of the GTA. 17% 66% 18% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Mostly in electronic format Mostly in hard copy Both equally In-Person Library Use None 24% 1-10 times 15% 11+ times 13% In-Person Bookstore Use None 24% 1-10 times 16% 11+ times 11% Online Book Vendor Use None 11% 1-10 times 18% 11+ times 21% Language English 17% French 8% Other 22% Region North 12% East 12% Southwest 16% Metro T.O. 21% GTA Urban 19% GTA Ex-urban 12%
  106. 106. Market Probe 106 12% 18% 51% 19% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% More than 10 times 6 to 10 times 1 to 5 times None • In the web survey, in-person bookstore use was a separate question from online use of book vendors, making comparisons to the telephone survey results invalid. • Web panelists between the ages of 25 and 34 and those whose preferred language is not English or French appear to visit bricks and mortar bookstores less often than other segments of the population. Past Year Bookstore In-Person Visit Frequency Q.14c Base: All respondents (1102). In-Person Library Use None 9% 1-10 times 11% 11+ times 16% Books Read in Past Year None 1% 1-5 5% 6-15 11% 16+ 25% Online Book Vendor Use None 5% 1-10 times 9% 11+ times 36% Social Media Interaction with Library Yes 21% No 11% Age 18-24 13% 25-34 7% 35-54 12% 55+ 13% Language English 12% French 12% Other 4% Region North 18% East 15% Southwest 10% Metro T.O. 13% GTA Urban 7% GTA Ex-urban 16%
  107. 107. Market Probe 107 14% 14% 41% 31% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% More than 10 times 6 to 10 times 1 to 5 times None • The percentage of web panelists visiting book vendors online more than 10 times in the last year is similar to the percentage visiting physical bookstores the same number of times, but at the other end of the scale, there are more people not visiting online book vendors at all. • Those with higher education and incomes were more apt to be frequent online book vendor users. Past Year Online Book Vendor Visit Frequency Q.14d Base: All respondents (1102). Books Read in Past Year None 5% 1-5 6% 6-15 15% 16+ 28% In-Person Bookstore Use None 9% 1-10 times 10% 11+ times 44% Education High school 8% Univ/college 13% Grad school 22% Income <$35K 14% $35K - <$75K 12% $75K+ 18% Born in Canada Yes 15% No 10% Language English 14% French 24% Other 6% Region North 16% East 19% Southwest 12% Metro T.O. 15% GTA Urban 12% GTA Ex-urban 10%
  108. 108. Market Probe 108 22% 47% 31% Online vendor more About the same Bookstores more Frequency of Visiting Online Book Vendor vs. Bookstore Q.14c/d Base: All respondents (1102). • Comparing individuals’ answers to the previous two questions, nearly one-quarter of those surveyed indicated that they used online book vendors more frequently than actually going to a bookstore, while almost one-third indicated the opposite. • Those who use online book vendors more include French-speaking Ontarians. Books Read in Past Year None 13% 1-5 18% 6-15 26% 16+ 28% In-Person Bookstore Use None 38% 1-10 times 19% 11+ times 12% Access Library by Internet Yes 25% No 19% Education High school 13% Univ/college 21% Grad school 33% Income <$35K 21% $35K - <$75K 18% $75K+ 28% Language English 21% French 37% Other 20% Region North 22% East 27% Southwest 23% Metro T.O. 24% GTA Urban 20% GTA Ex-urban 9%
  109. 109. Market Probe 109 Library vs. Bookstore Usage, In-Person and Online 9% 21% 26% 12% 21% 10% 13% 15% 19% 10% 25% 18% 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Library only Library more Both equally Bookstore more Bookstore only Neither In-Person Usage Online Usage • Comparisons of individuals’ reported frequency of using the library and bookstores in-person and online were made and are presented in the chart below. • With regard to in-person usage, the largest group of respondents reported using the library and bookstores about equally, while for online usage, use of bookstores exclusively predominated. • Interestingly, more people access both bookstores only and libraries only online as opposed to in-person (but in both cases, exclusive use of one over the other is much greater for bookstores than libraries). Q.2/3/14c/d Base: All respondents (1102).
  110. 110. Market Probe 110 33%67% Yes No 88% 35% 22% 11% 4% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% A desktop or laptop computer A tablet A smartphone An e-reader An iPod or MP3 player Accessing Library Resources Electronically Q.8c/d/e Base: Those who checked the library’s online catalogue, downloaded an item, or accessed other electronic materials on the library’s web page (449); Respondents who did not use an e-reader to access resources from the library (1054); Those who own an e-reader but did not use it to access resources from the library (349). Devices Used to Access Resources from the Library • Desktop or laptop computers remain the most common devices for accessing the public library electronically, with smartphones and tablets also having been used by approximately one-quarter to one-third of online users, respectively. • One-third of those who have not used an e-reader to access library resources actually own such a device, but of that group, fewer than one-third have ever attempted to use their e-reader to download books from the library. E-reader ownership (among those who have not used an e-reader to access library resources) 30% 70% Yes No Ever tried to download public library e-books using an e-reader
  111. 111. Market Probe 111 27% 22% 15% 13% 13% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Zinio Hoopla AskON Indieflix Freegal Familiarity and Use of New Electronic Channels Q.8f Base: Those who checked the library’s online catalogue, downloaded an item, or accessed other electronic materials on the library’s web page (449). Familiar with Channel • Relatively few of those who use the library to access electronic materials said they were familiar with the different electronic channels or services some libraries offer. • Zinio and Hoopla were most familiar to online library users, with the latter being accessed more through the library than elsewhere. Accessed via Library Account 7% 9% 3% 1% 4% Accessed Elsewhere 9% 2% 3% 2% 2%
  112. 112. Market Probe ATTITUDES TOWARD THE PUBLIC LIBRARY Market Probe
  113. 113. Market Probe 113 • Web panelists were not quite as concerned as telephone survey respondents about the impact a potential library closing would have on their community; still almost two-thirds thought that the impact would be major. • Those predicting the biggest impact were located in certain areas, namely Northern Ontario, Southwest Ontario and non-urban parts of the GTA. Impact of Public Library Closing on Community Q.16a-b Base: All respondents (1102). 64% 29% 7% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Major Impact Minor Impact No Impact at all Cardholder Yes 71% No 50% In-Person Library Use None 46% 1-10 times 67% 11+ times 86% Books Read in Past Year None 36% 1-5 57% 6-15 74% 16+ 76% In-Person Bookstore Use None 51% 1-10 times 66% 11+ times 76% Have Internet Access Work 64% Home 65% School 59% Library 77% Other 68% Access Library by Internet Yes 73% No 53% Access Library by Phone / Text Yes 74% No 62% Library Benefits Top 85% Middle 59% Bottom 29% Gender Male 60% Female 68% Age 18-24 51% 25-34 62% 35-54 62% 55+ 72% Children in Home Yes 70% No 62% Education High school 63% Univ/college 62% Grad school 73% Community Size <30K 75% 30K - <500K 70% 500K+ 60% Region North 76% East 58% Southwest 72% Metro T.O. 63% GTA Urban 60% GTA Ex-urban 75%
  114. 114. Market Probe 114 • Online survey participants were more apt to think closing of their local library would have a minor rather than a major impact on their family, whereas the opposite was true for those surveyed by phone. Impact of Public Library Closing on Family Q.16a-a Base: All respondents (1102). 32% 45% 23% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Major Impact Minor Impact No Impact at all Cardholder Yes 45% No 5% In-Person Library Use None 3% 1-10 times 32% 11+ times 79% Books Read in Past Year None 4% 1-5 21% 6-15 39% 16+ 53% In-Person Bookstore Use None 21% 1-10 times 34% 11+ times 42% Access Library by Phone / Text Yes 62% No 25% Have Internet Access Work 30% Home 32% School 29% Library 53% Other 31% Access Library by Internet Yes 51% No 8% Social Media Interaction with Library Yes 55% No 30% Library Benefits Top 63% Middle 20% Bottom 2% Gender Male 29% Female 35% Age 18-24 21% 25-34 25% 35-54 35% 55+ 36% Children in Home Yes 41% No 30% Education High school 29% Univ/college 31% Grad school 41% Income <$35K 23% $35K - <$75K 33% $75K+ 30% Language English 32% French 44% Other 28% Distance to Closest Public Library <5 km 36% 6-10 km 30% 11+ km 20%
  115. 115. Market Probe 115 33% 56% 11% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Top of list Middle of list Bottom of list Benefit of Public Libraries Relative to Other Municipal Tax-Supported Services Q.16 Base: All respondents (1102). • Where respondents placed the benefits the library delivers relative to other tax-supported services was very similar for the two populations surveyed. • Consistent with the findings from the telephone survey, people under the age of 35 were less likely to appreciate the benefits of the public library compared to other municipal services. Cardholder Yes 40% No 15% In-Person Library Use None 15% 1-10 times 31% 11+ times 64% Books Read in Past Year None 19% 1-5 23% 6 -15 36% 16+ 47% In-Person Bookstore Use None 29% 1-10 times 32% 11+ times 40% Access Library by Phone / Text Yes 47% No 29% Have Internet Access Work 30% Home 33% School 23% Library 46% Other 32% Access Library by Internet Yes 43% No 19% Age 18-24 22% 25-34 26% 35-54 34% 55+ 38% Education High school 35% Univ/college 30% Grad school 43%
  116. 116. Market Probe 116 53 41 40 40 39 37 35 30 28 26 23 22 21 • Except for a couple of items near the bottom of the list, web panelists did not value the different services the library provides as highly as phone survey respondents did. • The biggest difference of opinion between the two groups was with respect to early literacy programs. Perceived Value of Library Services Q.17 Base: All respondents (1102). 21 27 26 27 30 33 29 40 38 45 43 45 47 Bottom 6 Ratings (1-6 on a 10-pt. scale) Top 2 Ratings (9-10 on a 10-pt. scale) Lender of materials Provider of support for school projects or homework Reference centre Place to study Early literacy programs Local history collections Assistance in finding information Services to new Canadians Information for the unemployed Government services through library- based kiosks Trainer in how to access info online Focal point or meeting place Resources for small business and entrepreneurs
  117. 117. Market Probe 117 Value of Services by How Library Ranks Compared to Other Municipal Tax-Supported Services MeanScore Q.16/17 Base: All respondents (1102). 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 10.0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 LenderofM aterialsReference Centre Assistance in Finding Info Place to Study Early Literacy Progam s LocalHistory Collections Inform ation forUnem ployed Services to New Canadians Training in H ow to Access Info G overnm entServices Kiosks M eeting Place Resources forSm allBusiness Library at Top of List Library in Middle of List Library at Bottom of List • This chart (which shows the average value scores of the different library offerings according to where the library was placed relative to other tax-supported services) resembles the chart generated for those interviewed by phone, except all lines on this chart appear lower on the scale, and the line in the middle is not quite as close to the top line as it was for the phone survey.
  118. 118. Market Probe 118 • As was the case with value perceptions, web panelists claimed that they and others in their households have made less use of most of the services compared to those surveyed by phone. • The biggest gap in usage for the two populations was recorded for getting assistance in finding information. 55% 23% 20% 20% 16% 15% 10% 6% 6% 5% 5% 4% 3% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Past Year Usage of Library Services by Someone in Household Q.18 Base: All respondents (1102). Lender of materials Reference centre Assistance in finding information Place to study Help with school projects or homework Focal point or meeting place Local history collections Training in how to access information online Information for the unemployed Early literacy programs Government services through library- based kiosks Resources for small business and entrepreneurs Services to new Canadians
  119. 119. Market Probe 119 Value & Usage Combined Q.17/18 Base: All respondents (1102). 0 40 80 Assistance in finding information Early literacy programs Focal point or meeting place Government services through library-based kiosks Information for the unemployed Provider of support for school Reference centre Resources for small business and entrepreneurs Services to new Canadians Training in how to access info online Percent Valuing the Service Percent Using the Service • The chart below, which plots percent of web respondents giving each service a 9 or 10 on the 10-point value scale along with the percent of households using the service in the past year, is very similar to the corresponding chart for the phone survey. • The biggest difference between this pattern and the corresponding one for those surveyed by phone is that, for phone respondents, there was no gap between value and usage when it came to assistance in finding information. 0 40 80 Assistance in Finding Information Early Literacy Programs Focal Point or Meeting Place Government Services Kiosks Information for the Unemployed Lender of Materials Local History CollectionsPlace to Study Reference Centre Resources for Small Business Services to New Canadians Support for School Projects or Homework Training in How to Access Info Online
  120. 120. Market Probe 120 Lender of Materials Reference Centre Government Services Kiosks Meeting Place Early Literacy Programs Place to Study Local History Collections Training in How to Access Info Information for Unemployed Resources for Small Business Assistance in Finding Info Services to New Canadians Support of School Projects/Homework 6.2 6.4 6.6 6.8 7.0 7.2 7.4 7.3 7.5 7.7 7.9 8.1 8.3 8.5 8.7 8.9 Relative Value of Services to Users and Non-Users Q.17 Base: All respondents (1102). ValuetoNon-UsersofEachService Value to Users of Each Service • The chart below depicts relative value of each service, according to whether or not a household member used that service in the last year. The centre point of the x and y axes have been designed to represent the mid-point of user and non-user ratings, respectively, and the dotted line indicates points at which the relative value to users and non-users would be the same. • Lying furthest from the equal relative value line, services to new Canadians and support for school projects / homework are of higher relative value to non-users of these services than users of them, while the opposite is true for resources for small business and use of the library as a meeting place.
  121. 121. Market Probe 121 A program that allows people to try out the newest tech devices or applications, such as 3D printers or laser cutters Library kiosks located throughout the community where people can check out books, movies or music without having to go to the library itself A personalized online account that gives you recommendations based on your past library activity A cell phone app that allows you to access library services from your mobile phone An online research service where you could pose questions and get responses from librarians A cell phone app that helps you locate material easily in the library using GPS E-book readers already loaded with the book you want to read Instruction on how to use handheld reading devices and tablets Classes on how to download library e-books to handheld devices A digital media lab where you could create and upload new digital content like your own movies or e-books The Likelihood of Using Library Services • Online survey participants were asked their likelihood of using some new services libraries are either offering or thinking of offering in the future. Interest in these concepts varied, in many cases based on age. • There were very few suggestions made for other services over and above those shown. Other Services Library Should Provide More selection of materials / updated materials 2% Computer / Internet skills / technical devices 2% For kids / students 2% Educational courses / lectures / seminars / community events 2% Hobbies / special interests 2% Quiet space / reading / sitting areas 1% More online services, i.e. card renewals / book / material reserving 1% They do a good job 7% Other 16% No comments / suggestions 65% 19% 15% 15% 16% 10% 12% 12% 9% 9% 7% 36% 35% 35% 29% 33% 27% 26% 26% 24% 24% 55% 50% 49% 44% 44% 39% 38% 35% 33% 31% Very Likely Somewhat Likely Total 64% 46% 57% 39% 61% 39% 62% 24% 43% 37% 54% 19% 45% 34% 31% 40% 30% 38% 42% 21% By Age 18-34 55+ Q.13c/d Base: All respondents (1102).
  122. 122. Market Probe 122 Best Way to Inform about What’s Going On at the Library Q.13e Base: All respondents (1102). 66% 51% 45% 35% 34% 30% 26% 19% 8% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Email Articles in the local paper Information on the library's website Social media Notices at the library Notices in community centres or other public places Inserts with your tax bill or other local government mailings Notices in schools Talks/presentations to community groups • Panel members were asked to identify the best ways to inform them about what’s going on at their local public library. • Email, articles in the local paper, and information posted on the library’s website received the greatest numbers of mentions, in general, with younger people also favouring social media. 59% 73% 40% 63% 36% 48% 46% 22% 31% 34% 28% 32% 20% 32% 21% 12% 6% 12% By Age 18-34 55+
  123. 123. Market Probe 123 Believability of Positioning Statements Q.19 Base: All respondents (1102). • Four of the positioning statements tested with online respondents garnered stronger agreement than the rest. • There was least support for libraries providing information that would help people better understand political issues. 56% 54% 50% 46% 34% 32% 31% 30% 29% 28% 26% 26% 25% 19% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Public libraries are important because they promote literacy and a love of reading By providing free access to materials and resources, the public library plays an important role in giving everyone a chance to succeed Having a public library improves the quality of life in a community Public libraries are welcoming, friendly places The public library is the only affordable place where the average Ontarian can go for information Public libraries provide many services people would have a hard time finding elsewhere The public library provides valuable resources to increase health literacy within the communities it serves The public library is the best place for people of all ages to go to pursue lifelong learning Public libraries have done a good job of keeping up with new technologies The public library serves as an important meeting place and focal point within the community The public library is continually expanding the services it offers It is very easy to find whatever you are looking for at the public library Now that information is available from so many different sources, people need public libraries more than ever By providing access to information from a wide variety of sources, public libraries promote an understanding of political issues % Strongly Agree
  124. 124. Market Probe DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE OF RESPONDENTS Market Probe
  125. 125. Market Probe 125 Q.A/B Base: All respondents (1102). Respondent Age / Gender Respondent Age Gender 12% 16% 38% 35% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 18 to 24 25 to 34 35 to 54 55+ Average Age 46 48% 52% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Male Female • Since quotas were placed on age and gender, these numbers exactly match those from the telephone survey.
  126. 126. Market Probe 126 22% 8% 8% 6% 8% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 5 or younger 6 to 10 11 to 14 15 to 17 Number in Household / Presence of Children in Household Q.20/21a/b Base: All respondents (1102). Any Children Number in Household Presence of Children in Household 18% 40% 41% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% One Two Three or more Average Number 2.6 • Compared to the phone survey, there were significantly fewer households with three or more people and households with any children (especially under the age of 15).

Market Probe at GPL

Vistos

Vistos totais

301

No Slideshare

0

De incorporações

0

Número de incorporações

0

Ações

Baixados

2

Compartilhados

0

Comentários

0

Curtir

0

×