Barriers? Helps?

Barriers
The biggest barriers identified by the interviewee was the lack of clearly written information and the presence of conflicting information. When Kuhlthau (2000) concludes that information is "processed data that is found and given value by the expertise of the information worker" (p. 113), she goes on to identify that the value partly lies in the users ability to make use of that value provided by the information workers expertise. This is challenging in an environment where searching for information relies primarily on electronic resources. Such challenges are what Dervin (as cited by Thomas, 2004) would define as social and institutional barriers to information seeking.

Smith (1993) draws attention to this particular challenge of human and computer interaction by asking whether we are "using technology to enhance the capabilities of our human resources -- or are we using it to further enhance the bureaucratic tendencies of the organization" (p. 210). Chelton (1997) also addresses the issue of institutional control in her study of school library staff interactions with students. Using Chelton's study, it could be argued that both the FMLA and the University HR's electronic sources about the policy are being used to exert institutional authority over the user rather than providing legitimate service.

The interviewee can also identify with the users in Radford's (1998) study on how users decide to approach or avoid service interactions. The interviewee avoided a service interaction with both the Library and University HR based on previous experience. Radford, citing ten percent of the users in her study, ranks "familiarity" third among the five categories of reasons for not approaching a service provider for assistance.


Helps
While Hensley (1991) offers ideas for the reference interview based on Kolb's learning style theory (as cited by Thomas, 2004), many broad helps can be drawn from these suggestions that would have benefited this search process. These include, for feeling/relating, the suggestion to empathize with the user and personalize the encounter if possible. It was only when one service provider put the interviewee's personal context into account that she felt satisfied with the result. The reason this is helpful is more likely a result of the commonality to the Gutek and Welch (2000) service model than identifying this help to the interviewee's learning style. Gutek and Welch mention empathy among the qualities of a relationship model of service.

Hensley (1991) further suggests for thinking/reasoning types that the service provider (librarian) should appear authoritative and knowledgeable without being over-bearing, pushy, or smug. The University HR's flat "no" response to the interviewee's question was not helpful and reinforced her assumption that seeking information from this source would be a dead end. Hensley also suggests for the thinking/reasoning type, offering printed instructions. The interviewee expressed a preference for this.

Parasuraman, Berry, and Zeithaml's (1991) study on customer service expectations provides additional insights to what may have helped the interviewee's information need. Building on Gutek and Welsh (2000), Parasuraman, et al. found that customers want relationships and define them by stating "genuine customer relationships are built on the foundation of fairness, sincere efforts to understand and help the customer, and ongoing, personalized communications -- attributes of service most demonstrable in delivery"(p. 44). Parasuraman, et al. also conclude from simply that "customers expect service companies to do what they are supposed to do" (p. 40). Despite the interviewee's stated assumptions about the level of service provided by HR, there was an expectation that as Human Resources, they ought to be offering accurate resources regarding human issues in the workplace. This expectation was behind her feeling of frustration at the beginning of her search and her determination to find the answer.

It can be summarized that information service providers do not assess enough. A stronger focus on the evaluative component of Grover's model (as cited by Thomas, 2004) and avoiding premature or negative closures of the service transaction (Ross & Dewdney, 1999) would have helped in meeting the searchers information need. It was the service provider, who followed up on a routine email and sought to understand the situational context of the need, that allowed her to meet the information need and service expectations of the interviewee.