why librarians don't need to know about SEO

Lorcan writes about SEO.

Terminology sidebar:

First off I want to get some terminology out of the way.  SEO is problematic because:

SEO

1. Search Engine Optimisation. Ensuring that your website has proper keywords and content so as to be well indexed by search engines

SEO

2. Search Engine Optimisation. Using unethical means to pump up your site's PageRank, including link farms and link spamming

You can see why SEO is not a great term to use, because to some people it means an absolutely legitimate activity, and to others it means something bordering on fraud.

END SIDEBAR

My observation is that librarians (and people in general) tend to focus too much on details and terminology, and not enough on context and needs.

For example, in a typical presentation about link resolvers, a huge amount of time will be spent on the OpenURL syntax, despite the fact that no humans should need to know anything about the syntax, it's for machines to talk to machines.  From a computer science perspective, all I need to know is "web page uses (well-defined protocol) which is understood by (target application)".

Teaching people about OpenURL and expecting them to understanding a link resolving network is like teaching people about sparkplugs and expecting them to understand the National Highway System.

It's the wrong level of detail, about the wrong thing, without any context.

So instead of librarians knowing about (Web acronym du jour), isn't it about librarians understanding the International Internet System?  It's not about SEO, it's about understanding whether search is meeting your patrons' needs.

So first step back.  Step way back.  Separate your concerns.  Move way way up the technology stack.  Ask yourselves:

First, the patron view -

1. Are our patrons finding what they want?

(Note I didn't say "through the library".  I also didn't say "are they searching properly" or "are they finding the best resources".)

2. Do we have services or content that would add substantial value to them, that they are not finding?

The most obvious examples of these are the rich licensed content that users often don't (or can't) discover in an open web search.  For example, your library may license extensive access to newspapers for patrons, but they're out on the open web unable to access back issues or recent articles.  Or your library may license rich scientific databases that your patrons don't get search hits for.

3. Without having to provide some special education for the patrons (remember: the user isn't broken), how can we work better in their search workflows, in their discovery and working environments.

Notice I didn't say anything about microdetails of some Z39.50 feature of some specific screen of some federated search product.  That level of detail DOESN'T MATTER at this level.  Stop worrying about that level of detail.  Identify the problem you want to solve first.

Second, the library website view -

1. Why do you have a library website?
2. What unique value can you provide to your patrons through it?

Assuming you have answered 1 & 2 with some reasonable purpose and value, then

3. Do some analytics to find out how people are (or are not) finding your website.  Where are they coming from?  What searches are they using?  Are they finding the unique value you identified?  Are they finding some other value you didn't even know you had?

4. IF you're not reaching your patrons to meet THEIR goals, then you need to look at better ways to reach them.  This may include many different forms of outreach, including communications strategies, web browser tools, and oh yeah, maybe making sure your website shows up better in searches.

Third, the organisation content view -

Some libraries have a role to play in increasing the visibility of their organisation's own content.  The repository is one (notoriously unsuccessful) example of this.

1. What content does your organisation want to promote?
2. Is it showing up in searches?
3. If not, fix that.

In summary:

1. Find out what your patrons want
2. Determine if they're getting it
3. If they're not, look at a range of modern solutions to help them, based on their existing preferences and usage patterns

All of the above may involve different pieces of technology, but they're not ABOUT technology.  Stop worrying about micro technology details.

For example:

Example A:
Your library has great information about squid.
Your patrons search but they find another, adequate site about squid.
Success.

Example B:
You license a great chemistry database.
Your patrons search but they never find it or any chemistry information nearly as rich.
Using web stats, browser add-ons, a link resolver, OpenURLs, COINS, partnering, better keywords and page titles, a chemistry blog with rich content, and a communications strategy, they do find it.
Success.

Example C:
You have a repository of biology articles.
No one can find them because they're behind layers of repository mystery.
Using an understanding of the 21st century web, you make them visible to search engines.
(Or: you put them somewhere else on the web where they get better indexed.)
Success.

Notice how: 1. Your library doesn't have to be the destination for everything.  2. Your library doesn't have to intermediate everything.  3. The needs come first, the technology only comes way, way at the end.

That being said, I do recognize that as the library intermediates less (or is perceived to intermediate less) you do risk your brand, which in the long term risks your sustainability.  But that's a marketing issue, not a technology one.  If you want prominent branding on publisher sites, refuse to license their content unless they provide it.

In case it's not clear from the title, what I'm saying is, don't start with the technology thing (SEO, Web 2.0, Semantic Web, whatever).  If you do that, you just end up in an endless race after technology-driven solutions, buried in the ever-changing details of the technology of the day.  Start with the problem, then once you know what the problem is, see what the solutions are.  The solution may involve no technology whatsoever.

IF you've gone through the analysis of the problem and discovered that web ranking of your pages or your organisation's content is an issue, then a great place to start is... OUseful's Why Librarians Need to Know About SEO.

Comments

[Ed Vielmetti]

Search optimization has to be seen in a different perspective for academic and special collections libraries. There are lots of collections of interesting stuff that use highly esoteric jargon which is not at all what people who are non-specialists who are searching will find. The role of the intermediary (whether it be a librarian or a thesaurus designer) is to connect the jargon with the popular phrases so that when I e.g. look for "bus tracking systems" I find somewhere in there the 1000s of pieces of the literature on "intelligent vehicle location", none of which mention bus tracking at all.