Comments on: Rose and Thorn

By: josh

josh — Wed, 26 Jul 2006 20:03:54 +0000

don’t get sucked into it personally, deal with the issue at hand, don’t escalate the problem, finish it off and move on.
The next patron is a new opportunity.

Good point, Steve. That was always my attitude when I was working retail. Of course, I wasn’t a supervisor then, so I didn’t really have to worry about the policies, I just had to enforce them (and call a supervisor to back me up and deal with things when they got too hairy).

By: Steve

Steve — Wed, 26 Jul 2006 19:27:49 +0000

Sure, there are some screwballs in the world, and they don’t just patronize the library. They go to stores, they hang out in parks, they eat out…they’re everywhere. They spice things up; keep us on our toes.
And sure, there are people who see every rule as an opportunity to challenge the system. From what I can tell, some of them even treat it as a sport.
I coach my staff to understand that someone else’s personality ticks have nothing to do with us, or with the library. It’s their problem, not our’s. And to me, that is the trick to dealing with this stuff- don’t get sucked into it personally, deal with the issue at hand, don’t escalate the problem, finish it off and move on.
The next patron is a new opportunity.

By: josh

josh — Mon, 24 Jul 2006 12:32:27 +0000

PS my usual goal is to get these type out the door ASAP even if it means going against my better judgment to satisfy them. This is the hard part that makes you wonder if it’s “worth it” at times right?

That part doesn’t really make me wonder if it’s worth it. (And I also frequently try to get them out the door, hopefully given as much as we can give to them. I think there are some patrons we can stand to lose.) The part that gets me is when the rosy patrons stub their toes on the policies that are there because of the thorny patrons.

But you’re absolutely right. Most of the rotten users will be rotten everywhere they go, to everyone. (I think other rotten users are being rotten only because we’re catching them at a bad moment. In which case, treating them nicely, giving them the benefit of the doubt, will foster a much better relationship than treating them like the enemy.)

By: sylvie szafranski

sylvie szafranski — Mon, 24 Jul 2006 12:13:22 +0000

I try to remind myself (and everyone I can) that some people (broken and/or clueless) are that way EVERYWHERE THEY GO, and IN EVERYTHING THEY DO. It remains important not to define ourselves, and our services with them as our target since their focus will remain; “what’s wrong with everything”.
The great majority of our users will help us define our ROSE relevance, not the few who may only respond to THORN.

By: josh

josh — Mon, 24 Jul 2006 01:56:07 +0000

But the point is that you can also see the others, the ones who aren’t broken. And you can see the value of working hard for those unbroken patrons. THAT’s what I don’t want to lose.

Yes, you’re right, Iris. That’s what I was trying to get to. There will always be some fractured users. But if you go into the profession assuming that users are broken, you’ll just create more broken users.

It is frustrating, though, when the library feels it has to set policy based on the broken users–the old “one bad apple spoiling the bunch.”

By: Iris

Iris — Sun, 23 Jul 2006 22:02:26 +0000

I agree, Josh. And there are some people who use my library that are at least fractured, if not entirely broken. (One or two are entirely broken. So far beyond broken that they can’t even remember what being whole felt like.) But the point is that you can also see the others, the ones who aren’t broken. And you can see the value of working hard for those unbroken patrons. THAT’s what I don’t want to lose.

I’m all for constructive complaining, and even a little venting, as long as that’s not the focus of your existence.