It is becoming more popular to create new libraries as statement buildings, iconic designs both outside and in. This is even more the case now that competition is increasing between universities, with those who choose not to (or can't) build new opting for refurbishing and making dramatic modifications to their libraries.

In spite of the differences between each new build or refurbishment, there are some commonalities that demonstrate some very particular trends across the board, particularly in academic libraries.

And each of these can come with potential problems...

Light is obviously a big deal, especially when you are dealing with reading and learning spaces. Too little, you get a dark, miserable building that's difficult to work in, too much and you get temperature problems, stock preservation issues and a building that's difficult to work in... Also, oddly, there are potential light problems if skylights are used, as the sun passes by creating dark and bright spots. Want your visitors to move around the rooms a lot to get the best light? Put skylights in.

Zoning is becoming more common, and can vary between whole floor zoning or zoned areas providing a variety of uses across the floor.

How successful the zoning is will depend on a number of factors: signage, policing (and self policing by library users), whether zoning matches the design of a space, and whether, when using multiple zones on one floor/area makes sure contrasting zones are well separated.

Colour is used to try and inspire, interest, and draw in visitors, or even just to create a profile and identity for the library. The right kind of colours can influence behaviour and mental state, so libraries often incorporate colour schemes to promote academic behaviour.

However, colour choices can also go horribly wrong, put people off using the building, look dated very quickly...

This is where I start to play library design bingo. SO many libraries have an atrium now. It tends to be an architect statement, but that isn't to say libraries haven't made the choice at all... Atria help noise travel and echo, they create temperature problems by encouraging all the hot air upwards, and you can't guarantee library visitors won't start throwing things over the balconies...

This image shows a library with an atrium done right, as far as I can tell without visiting. They've glazed over the balconies which should help let light in but keep temperatures stable and prevent noise travelling. That helps make for more flexibility on each floor, so that areas can be easily designated silent or discussion without too much worry about noise bleeding onto other floors.

Without glazing, positioning shelving to buffer noise and making sure there are opening windows near desks will help any problems arising to some extent.

Ok, so maybe not THIS level of technology, but certainly technology has long been here and is here to stay - it just depends on what format it takes. Library spaces are incorporating more opportunities for visitors to use their own equipment, which helps reduce the onus on the library to constantly add new gadgets to the equipment stock, but also gives them time to assess what could be purchased in the future.

But the thoughts of technology lead me to think about the next slide...

There's also a choice for what kind of environment you create within new designs. Traditional designs for libraries are still popular to some extent, and they are still what a lot of people think of when they think of what a library looks like. Books piled or opened everywhere, heads down to read under a desk lamp for solo work, wooden tables, echoing high ceilings...

In contrast to the traditional, most modern libraries are being designed for collaboration, for comfort, for a wide variety of uses. I venture to suggest that this kind of environment is designed more from a 'customer' perspective which is a terrible way to refer to library users, but summarises that sense of being for the benefit of each individual visitor, no matter what their intended use is.

However, both these designs can potentially intimidate people and put them off using the building - it depends entirely on their experiences prior to visiting our libraries.

Accessibility isn't purely making sure there's enough room to move a wheelchair through the stacks or between floors, or providing the right software. It's about lighting, colours, spaces that feel safe and comfortable for all visitors.

Bright colours and lights of a certain tone are often chosen to stimulate visitors, but can exclude some people with disabilities that aren't necessarily visible. So all those design choices I mentioned earlier? They might be stopping a lot of people from visiting the library.

Provide private spaces and noise blocking headphones for those who need it. Engage and involve ALL kinds of library users to ensure you provide comfortable environments for as many people as possible.

If you want to learn more about this, Penny Andrews has written a chapter for an upcoming User Experience book edited by Andy Priestner and Matt Borg talking about accessibility issues in libraries and her own experiences.

Ideally, architects and library staff work together to create something that works on all levels.
Even BETTER, architects and library staff work with library patrons to create something that works on all levels!

We are prone to blame poor design choices on the designers, but it can also be down to the choices made by senior management, or by librarians themselves, for many reasons including lack of awareness of usage patterns. And we forget that we don't use our libraries in the same way our visitors do - we all too often make assumptions about library users without asking them for their input or conducting research to learn about their use.

We are creating spaces that are an extension of people's homes. They want to nap, eat and drink, and sing whilst listening to their own music (via headphones). The library is no longer a church for studying, it is an environment that mirrors what people have at home, or can't get at home.

But I think we forget that we are providing that kind of space with new designs. We shouldn't be surprised that people visit our libraries and want to use them in lots of different kinds of ways. And we are missing lots of usage patterns as most of us don't use the library. We create spaces, but often don't know how they are used, and whether our policies work with or against what they tell library users.

So maybe we need to start thinking of libraries as less like this...

And more like this.

Libraries often still communicate a very religious contemplative atmosphere, no matter whether they are traditional or modern. There's that sense of need to be silent for many, but there's a growing number of people who use academic libraries with little prior library experience, and don't make the connections many of us had as children with that concept of library as holy. We end up with some level of conflict between use because of lack of experience meeting the messages of the design.

And seriously, why else would we have comfy sofas in libraries if not to provide napping spots?

Once you've got your library, there's actually some level of flexibility to modify areas that seem problematic by design, by creating or modifying zones. I talked earlier about how zoning can sometimes be problematic, so a cheap way of trying to curb a problem in usage patterns is to modify what you want to people to be able to do in those problematic areas.

OR maybe you should look at what people are doing in those areas, and create rules that MATCH that behaviour? Act on the dominant behaviour and modify other spaces that are more friendly to the original intention. There's no point putting furniture in that ends up being used by groups in an area designated for quiet or silent use. And there's no point putting discussion areas by silent or quiet ones.

When trying to modify use of a space, keep in mind that 'environmental press' may be an issue, where previous habits can continue even if the design and rules have changed, but if the design and rules match properly, they should lend themselves to work with little effort in advertising the change. And if the rule change doesn't work, then something as simple as moving around furniture between spaces can help modify the space enough to make it feel different. Sounds really obvious, but you'd be surprised how little it happens in practice.

There's an old (2008) quote from a library conference panel that Joyce Valenza discussed - libraries shouldn't be grocery stores, they should be kitchens. Libraries should be the place people can start to put their research ingredients together, but those ingredients include a lot of items we don't realise contribute to the final product. Valenza talked about how the library should also be a dining room and a family room, so that they allow people to gather and share what they are working on, and we've put the spaces in to allow that kind of action, without remembering that there are other actions connected with that environment and collaborative style that appear to be 'wrong' use but may well help productivity.

If we want to support our library users and provide an environment that benefits as many people as possible, we need to get into our libraries and study how they use the spaces.

There's a few ways we can do that.

1) Conduct observations to learn about what people are doing. Be careful, as you need ethical approval, but observation is one of the key ways of learning about what people REALLY do in your spaces. Any method relying on student feedback can sometimes be skewed by their own perceptions of what they do, and some things may not seem important, but observations reveal actions that they may not be aware of themselves.

2) Carry out open questioning techniques in any interviews you do carry out. The more open and semi-structured, the better, as you usually get more reflective responses from the interviewee. You may also wish to ask the interviewee to take you on a tour of the library as they see it - a few libraries have or are currently using this technique with great results.

However, these can take up quite a lot of time (although there are ways you can shorten the observation process by focussing only on specific actions). Time and thus staff costs are worth investing when you need to make sure library design is right, but if you really are short on time there are other ways of getting information.

3) Cognitive mapping has been used successfully in the US in the ERIAL project, and by Donna Lanclos at UCC Atkins. In the UK, Meg Westbury has been using it to learn about the use of library spaces at Cambridge.

Give someone a piece of paper with a question on it, three different coloured pens, and ask them to map out their answer to the question for six minutes They need to change the colour of their pen every two minutes so you can see what they draw first. Then ask them to label up what the map shows, and for more information about everything they have.

It isn't a new technique, but it's new to libraries, and has so far proven to be highly illuminating for something that takes comparatively little time.

4) Leaving flipcharts around the library are a simple, cheap and easy way to get feedback from your users too. Naturally it isn't as extensive as some other methods, but if you are short on time and money, you can learn a lot from them.

Write a question at the top, leave it in an area you want to learn more about, and get feedback that is often more honest than a survey. It's done on the visitor's own time and motivation, with some level of privacy from staff, so you can use it to ask key questions and about services.

Be aware the kind of question you ask might mean you will get LOTS of different answers, or might just end up with yes or no answers, so think carefully about what you want.

Use the data you have to drive the new build or guide changes to the current spaces. But remember: there's still a need to design with the library patrons in mind, rather than what you *think* is needed. Steer away from designing to make things easier for you and towards what functions best from a library visitor perspective.

Don't try and 'fix' things without speaking to the people using the space first. It sounds obvious but it's important to remember that things that don't work for you might be working for the people who actually stay in the space. If you know that the space's inhabitants aren't happy with the way it works (or doesn't work), then look at the reasons why, look at viable changes that don't cost lots.

Moving furniture around the area, or replacing it with different kinds of furniture from elsewhere in the building could make a dramatic change to the way a space works. Don't be afraid to try things out and move them back if they don't work.

Work with your visitors to modify and improve what you have by challenging them.

Ask them what they would do with the library spaces with absolutely no limitations on what they can include, then ask them to work together to pick out the plausible features and plan out how spaces would be set up and designed. This technique has been used a lot in the US to help create new builds or modify existing one, and allowing them to start with unlimited design options but moving to consider budget and what would actually work provides a different approach to solving any issues.

Or ask them to work together on a particular space they've had problems in when visiting it, using what furniture and features they have seen elsewhere in the building. Then test these suggestions by presenting them to people using the space and getting feedback.

A user-led modification or design means that library users feel engaged, reminds them that they are the centre of your reason for working there. And they will appreciate the difficulties you've experienced trying to create the best environment you can for them.