Segmentation techniques for expanding a library instruction market: Evaluating and brainstorming

Segmentation techniques for expanding a

library instruction market

Evaluating and brainstorming

Rebecca Warrena,*, Sherman Hayesa, Donna Gunterb

aRandall Library, University of North Carolina at Wilmington,

601 S. College Road, Wilmington, NC 28403, USAbAtkins Library, University of North Carolina at Charlotte, Charlotte, NC, USA

Abstract

This article describes a two-part segmentation technique applied to an instruction program during a

strategic planning process. This technique was used to better understand the characteristics and needs

of the instruction program audiences. First described is the brainstorming technique used to create a

comprehensive segment list of the existing and potential audiences of the instruction program. Second

is a description of the follow up review session that evaluated past years’ efforts using this new

language of segmentation. D 2003 Elsevier Science Inc. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Brainstorming; Segmentation; Strategic planning; Library instruction programs; Creativity;

Academic libraries

Do you really knowwho your current clients are in your instructional program? Do you have

a vision of potential clients and needs? Do you have a priority list of the next instructional

audiences that your library wants to help? Are there current parts of your program that should be

de-emphasized so you can get to some others you desperately want to expand?

It is no longer inspiration, or being creatively talented. Anyone can be creative—provided

they learn and develop their skills.

Edward de Bono

0734-3310/01/$ – see front matter D 2003 Elsevier Science Inc. All rights reserved.

PII: S0734 -3310 (02 )00086 -1

* Corresponding author.

E-mail addresses: [email protected] (R. Warren), [email protected] (S. Hayes), djgunter@email.

uncc.edu (D. Gunter).

Research Strategies 18 (2001) 171–180

Even though this paper is not intended to cover why there is a critical need to improve and

increase instruction, the following list of a few obvious instruction foci demonstrates the

necessity for librarians to move beyond mere statistical descriptions of their clientele.

� The explosion in electronic resources has expanded and made information retrieval

more complex.� College students are more diverse in ethnic background and age.� Students must learn to use electronic resources in an academic environment in a

different way than they do recreationally.� College curricula are becoming more interdisciplinary, meaning faculty, who have

specialized in a small disciplinary area, are increasingly dependent on professional

librarians to become acquainted with the research methods of other fields.� Many faculty are still acclimating to the new technological environment.� Students often have complex schedules that make serious demands on their time.� Faculty using instructional services are usually unable to keep up with the changes in

information in their field or changing library products.� Faculty and student audiences are reluctant to give the library large blocks of predictable

time to learn new material and techniques. Everyone wants ‘‘instant gratification’’ and

‘‘instant learning.’’� The institution assumes that technology and related instructional techniques must

always be modern and up to date and used in instruction, whether there is technological

support or not.� There are few instructional programs that are receiving significant new professional

positions for instruction, while the learning potential remains high and growing.

A library’s instruction program will grow or change based on the characteristics of those

who randomly approach it unless its future is strategically planned. Instructional services

programs may well still grow by a random approach model, but hopefully it will also change

by choosing to cultivate segments and to negotiate improved instructional services with and

for those segments.

The most damaging phrase in the language is: ‘‘It’s always been done that way.’’

Rear Admiral Grace Hopper

Managers of instructional programs in academic libraries typically know their clientele

statistically; they know how many classes they teach, which disciplines they are reaching,

whether or not the instruction sessions are for graduate or undergraduate classes, andwhether or

not they are research methodology classes. They also usually provide an evaluation instrument

that tells perhaps a little more. This ‘‘statistical’’ model focuses on ‘‘how many’’ participate in

the program, based on obvious classes. In our library, we have historically followed this

approach; however, we found ourselves wanting to know our clientele in a more complex way.

This article describes a two-part segmenting technique that we have recently applied to our

instructional program as part of a strategic planning process that gave us a better

understanding of the characteristics and needs of our ‘‘customers.’’ After we discuss the

R. Warren et al. / Research Strategies 18 (2001) 171–180172

concepts of ‘‘market segmentation’’ and then of ‘‘brainstorming,’’ we describe the brain-

storming technique that we used to create a wide-ranging pie-in-the-sky comprehensive

segment list for audiences of our library instruction program. Next is an account of our efforts

to target specific markets using this new language of segmentation.

1. Segmentation

The best way to have a good idea is to have a lot of ideas.

Linus Pauling

We decided to view our clients through a myriad of different filters or segments, by not

changing the customer, but by rethinking the descriptive model of the customer base to better

identify potential. Marketing segmentation is a common approach in a ‘‘selling’’ or marketing

plan for any company. We do not propose that one has to adopt all of the buzzwords and

change all terminology over to the full business set; however, it is useful to analyze how

business approaches the subject of market and how one can pick those parts that are useful to

one’s service approach. If one approaches any marketing text or dictionary, the section on

market segmentation will be very standard across the texts indicating that the concept has

reached a level of standard practice in business. Here are some quick definitions to

demonstrate commonalities:

� ‘‘The process of subdividing a market into distinct subsets of customers that behave in

the same way or have similar needs. Each subset may conceivable be chosen as a market

target to be reached with a distinct marketing strategy’’ (Bennett, 1995, p. 166).� ‘‘Market segmentation is the process of dividing a diverse market into groups of

consumers with relatively similar characteristics, wants, needs, buying habits, or

reactions to marketing efforts’’ (Beachham, Hise, & Tongren, 1986, p. 505).� ‘‘To be effective, a market segment must be measurable, profitable, accessible, and

meaningful’’ (Beachham et al., 1986, p. 507).

Some of the key definitional points include: market segmentation must be tied to

marketing strategies; customers are not the same and can be approached most effectively if

their differences/similarities are documented and, whenever possible, the analysis should be

based on data and studies versus intuition. Our filter structures the segments on a logic

appropriate to academic libraries and to instructional possibilities within that service industry.

Market segmentation is the process of ‘‘subdividing of a market into distinct subsets of

customers, where any subset may conceivably be selected as a target that behave in the same

way or have similar needs’’ (Bennett, 1995, p. 166). For the library instruction manager, the

new aim is to identify subsets of customers in ways that move beyond the cursory look for

potential classes in the college catalog. According to Linda Morton (1998), a good way to

identify ‘‘distinct subsets of customers,’’ or to move beyond the ‘‘statistical’’ way of viewing

a market, would be to examine the market demographically, psychographically and socio-

R. Warren et al. / Research Strategies 18 (2001) 171–180 173

graphically. Viewing a potential client demographically means that one looks at ‘‘age, gender,

race, family size and status, income, education, occupation, and geographic information’’

(Morton, 1998, p. 33). Looking at the market psychographically involves looking at

‘‘personality and other psychological characteristics’’ (Morton, 1998, p. 33). Examining

the potential instruction patron sociographically requires looking at the ‘‘groups that public

members belong to, as well as other sociological characteristics’’ (Morton, 1998, p. 34).

Viewing a client base through the lens of demographics, psychographics, and sociographics

opens many new ways to identify potential classes of students.

We all use segmentation techniques to structure information in our world. While we are

suggesting a business model to help libraries look at their operations in a new light, we do not

want to adopt a social science jargon that makes this process more difficult than it really is.

This is about using common sense in looking at the customers but looking with changing

filters and ‘‘new eyes.’’ Take as a example the area of collegiate athletics. Many of us talk

about athletics and we segment athletics from a multitude of variables.

� Intercollegiate athletics versus intramural� Women’s, men’s and coed� By type of sport: basketball, tennis, softball, rugby, etc.� Scholarship athletes or nonscholarship athletes� Universities by conference (voluntary associations of schools, ACC, CAA, Big Eight)� Sports by season (spring sports)� Formal size and divisions as defined by the NCAA (Divisions I, II, and III)� Success (winning programs, etc.)� Major sports or minor sports

Besides using the segmentation filter to get a description of current and potential markets,

the entity needs to follow through with a market segmentation strategy. How are you going to

use the segment information to target specific groups? A fairly standard business approach is

to divide the logical strategies into three choices:

(1) undifferentiated marketing— in which the business attempts to go after the whole market

with a product and marketing strategy intended to have mass appeal; (2) differentiated

marketing— in which the business operates in several segments of the market with offerings

and market strategies tailored to each segment; (3) concentrated marketing— in which the

business focuses on only one or a few segments with the intention of capturing a large share

of these segments (Bennett, 1995, p. 166).

2. Brainstorming

Our best thoughts come from others.

Ralph Waldo Emerson

We present this framework using brainstorming techniques to suggest ways that the

customer base can be segmented. Brainstorming is a specific technique developed by Alex F.


Osborn who introduced the modern brainstorming session in 1938 as a means ‘‘of using the

brains to storm a problem’’ (Osborn, 1963, p. 151). Reick (1999, p. 78) wrote, ‘‘Brainstorm-

ing is not about creative execution. It’s about idea creation.’’ Brainstorming allows the

instruction manager to discover ideas before being burdened by the analytical work involved

in creation. To ‘‘storm the brain,’’ Osborn (1963, p. 152) suggested four basic rules to have a

successful group brainstorming session.

1. Criticism is ruled out. Adverse judgments of ideas must be withheld until later in the

process. This is the key to successful brainstorming— suspending judgment such as ‘‘what a

stupid idea’’— and can be one of the hardest things for ever-critical librarians to do. ‘‘Ideas

need to flow, and flow freely. This is not easy for the analytical type. Nature dictates that

every idea is evaluated on the spot-passed, butchered, counter-suggested or dismissed’’

(Heimer, 1999, p. 26).

2. ‘‘Free-wheeling’’ is welcomed. The wilder the idea, the better; it is easier to tame down

than to think up.

3. Quantity is wanted. The greater the number of ideas, the more likelihood of useful ideas.

4. Combination and improvement of ideas are sought.

The notion of free association of ideas without judgment leading to a richer source of

creative input possible is not a new idea. This type of creative group collaboration dates

back some 400 years to a technique used by Hindu teachers (Osborn, 1963, p. 151). But

what Osborn did was to take this idea from theoreticians and moved it into an applied

science in the business world (Clegg, 1999, p. 10). There is a constant criticism of

brainstorming because people confuse it with the actual implementation or operational

phase of creating a plan of action. It is perceived as easy to come up with ‘‘wild-haired’’

ideas. Many people dismiss the technique because each and every idea is not practical,

feasible, or can raise false expectations among those participating in the exercise. Bachman

(2000) proposes a new ‘‘Brainstorming Deluxe’’ system. He offers ‘‘value-added’’ brain-

storming, which wants to structure the brainstorming session around lists of objectives that

really combine idea generation with solutions planning. His brainstorming categories are (1)

demand, (2) objectives, and (3) resources (Bachman, 2000, p. 15). While the article may be

helpful, we contend that it is representative of a normal attempt to short-circuit and guide

the brainstorming session to practicality too quickly. There is nothing wrong with true

brainstorming first and then using other creative processes to move to the next planning

stages (Hurt, 2000).

Clearly no group can as an entity create ideas. Only individuals can do this. A group of

individuals may, however, stimulate one another in the creation of ideas.

Estill I. Green

Brainstorming as our library conducted it and as is generally conducted is a specific group

process. However, the term has grown to include the general concept of generating a large list

of ideas without limiting reality so that it can even be used for individuals who want to just

practice creating ideas. If you cannot find a compatible group or a large enough group to try

this at your library, it is also possible to use the elements as an individual to help think of

segments for your instructional program.


There are any numbers of framing devices within the brainstorming session that one can use

and ours is not a proscribed one. For our brainstorming session, we chose to generate ideas for

our market segments through the journalistic technique of ‘‘who, what, when, where, and

why.’’ Since we are attempting to identify potential clients demographically, psychographi-

cally, and sociographically, we are aiming at ‘‘who’’ we are teaching. However, we believed

that, if we could examine ‘‘what’’ we teach, ‘‘where’’ we teach, ‘‘when’’ we teach, and ‘‘why’’

we teach, then we could discover more about ‘‘who’’ we teach.

To conduct the brainstorming sessions, we met as a group; we had a stand-up easel and pad

and one sheet of paper was used per ‘‘idea category.’’ That is, one sheet of paper was used for

‘‘who,’’ another for ‘‘what,’’ etc. One person led the session and wrote the ideas on the pad.

We have arranged our session results in a table format to make it easier to see what our

segmentation generated. We have not edited or refined this list, as we wanted to present a real

sample of the roughness of the initial product of brainstorming (Tables 1–5).

Table 1

Who: segmented by group type

Classes Special backgrounds

Department/academic

Department/nonacademic

. Continuing education, staff,

. Registered nurses getting BA, senior citizens,

older than average students, dually enrolled

high school and college students

lab attendants, researchers Athletes

from independent units, visitors International students

Potential students . Regular, long-term, short-term programs

Community members Students with disabilities

Area librarians Minorities

Alumni . Race, religion, ethnic group

Friends of the library Gifted students

Visiting scholars Summer enrichment

Faculty assignments Women/men

Level in the courses (advanced, etc.) Student groups

Grad students Fraternities/sororities, student government,

Individual interest Special interest club

One-on-one thesis preparation

Students level by year

Honors

Table 2

What: segmented by types of instruction

One-on-one Bibliographic instruction

Reference Lecture method

Web-based Hands on practice

Course-based Self-directed

Orientation Manuals

Public relations Guides


Table 4

When: segmentation by timing

. Scheduled sessions, class requests

. As needed on demand

. Web-based, no set time

. Labor-driven (labor available, instructors, vacations, conferences)

. Cycles in the calendar, start of thesis prep, paper-writing season, dorm move in, visitation periods

(not yet students) summers, start of the semester, accreditation visits, perennial assignments

. Resource availability–fiscal year

. New products–demand action (training for NC LIVE, a new suite of electronic resources)

. Altered products (altered by library or vendor, new iterations of database

Table 3

Where: segmented by delivery or consumption location

Library instruction room WEB-based

Classrooms outside the library but on traditional campus . Formal course approach

Remote classrooms off of campus . Tutorials

Computer labs . Structured chat rooms

Reference desks . Linked conversations

Paper-individual-based, guides . Guides

Where ever the audience meets outside library: . Reference services

. Study hall for athletes . Reference/instruction

. Diversity center

. Honors dorm

. Fraternity house

. Conference setting (professional meeting)

. Faculty office

Table 5

Why: segmented by motivation

. Class component requirement

. Personal interest

. Job-related issues work/school

. Getting a job–career

. Subject coverage

. Change in information sources and delivery

. Creating a comfortable atmosphere and attitude in and towards the library

. Prepare for the future/mindset for using sources academically

. Make sure we are part of teaching of information agenda, i.e., board of trustees presentation

. Respond to institutions priorities

. What’s fun for librarians to do


These lists are unfinished and not refined, which is one of the major characteristics of a

brainstorming session; is a list of ideas, not a finished product.

3. Evaluation and planning

People are disturbed, not by things, but by the view they take of them.

Epictetus

The actual segmentation process is the follow-up to brainstorming and can be described in

two stages: (1) evaluation of past efforts using segmentation language and (2) planning for the

future efforts, also using segmentation language. To evaluate our past activities, at a recent

annual review and planning session for instruction, we talked about our successful year’s

efforts and specifically chose to infuse the conversation with segmentation language discov-

ered through our brainstorming session. We started the discussion with a traditional description

of our program divided by academic department. However, at summary points within the

conversation and at the end of the conversation, we divided the instructional sessions into

several other segments to better understand the impact of our program. These included:

� Labs versus classroom presentation� Web course delivery or traditional� Subdivisions within the departments� Review by individual faculty as a specific targeted segment� Basic versus advanced orientation of class� Interdisciplinary versus traditional subjects� Community versus university audience� New faculty versus mid-career versus senior faculty� New curriculum emphasis or established� Ease of delivery� Successful versus unsuccessful subject coverage� Nontraditional versus traditional students

The second stage of the segmentation process following up on the brainstorming came

after evaluation of past efforts. After brainstorming and evaluation, one does need to choose

strategic initiatives based on the segment filtering efforts. Some of our recent segmented

instructional outreach efforts have included (the perceived target segment identified through

the brainstorming session is in bold).

1. Experimenting on how to best give with freshmen and transfer student athletes

formal presentations within their limited time availability. This grew out of an identified

group of athletes required to be in the library but there was no formal library program directed

towards their needs. A librarian met with the head of Athletics.

2. We are partnering with individual faculty to explore how our instruction program can

dovetail into an increased use of the Web for delivery of instruction. This group was


identified in the exercise because the individual librarians had already been approached to

help as the institution adopted a campus standard for Web-based course offerings. Without a

group conversation, it is uncertain whether many of these leads would have surfaced,

although all of them were present in the mind and experience of at least one staff member.

Librarians partnered with faculty to discuss ways in which the library could provide course

specific Web-based library instruction.

3. We have created, through a partnership of Reference and Instructional Services, a one-

on-one consultation service with graduate students just entering their thesis preparation

stages (the STAR PROGRAM). We had identified the obvious segment of graduate students,

but tried to divide that segment by considering their time to degree completion. Thus, we

came up with the ‘‘time of need’’ centered on the critical early thesis search phase. This

instruction program is comprised of traditional reference appointments packaged and

marketed to a specific group.

4. Partnership teaching efforts with the Learning Center (centralized tutoring system for

students seeking supplemental help on campus). The Learning Center is located in the

Library; however, the University Librarian does not administer it. Again, this program is

based on the reference appointment model discussed above.

5. Fostering a partnership with Center for Teaching Excellence on ways to reach faculty

within the workshop system offered by this Center.

6. A subcommittee has been exploring new early contacts and components of instruction

with audiences (students and new faculty) that have not yet arrived on campus but have

committed to coming to the University. The original idea came from a librarian who pointed

out the need to help new faculty as they arrive. This program consists of meeting with the

new faculty to teach them about the resources the library has to offer them, especially

instructional services.

7. We have recently increased our partnerships with an instructional specialist for the

School of Nursing (fortunately for us she is a professional librarian, although not part of our

faculty) to customize and supplement her efforts with nursing faculty and students

(undergraduate and graduate).

8. We are reviewing our new faculty marketing plans to insure coverage. Specific

operational plans are being proposed around planned visits by outreach librarians during the

first semester of new faculty arrival and follow-up phone calls to faculty who toured the library

during their interview phase, suggesting services such as Table of Contents and e-reserves.

9. One new segment filter that will be applied this year is to track new program offerings

and our ability to support them with instruction (i.e., new master’s degree in Public

Administration). We are matching this instructional outreach effort with a review of our

project funds that are competitive purchases offered particularly to new faculty.

10. We will increase coverage of seminar classes (higher-level subject coverage). This will

involve creating a small database of potential classes from the catalog and matching it to our

existing instructional portfolio.

11. We are planning to analyze our coverage in particularly active programs (freshman

English) and try to expand to 100% of the classes receiving formal library instruction by

forming a relationship with the Coordinator of Composition.


4. Conclusion

I hate quotations. Tell me what you know.

Ralph Waldo Emerson

The need for innovative planning for instructional services in academic libraries is greater

today than ever before. Segmenting the existing program audiences and brainstorming to

segment potential instructional services customers are important methods to enhance any

instruction program. Understanding existing and potential customer bases is a core require-

ment in order to strategically increase learning any institution. Earlier in the article we

highlighted three strategies of segmentation that one could logically adopt. We have

obviously adopted the differentiated strategy where one chooses to operate in several

segments of the market with offerings and market strategies tailored to each segment. We

are going to start a new project, which will document our current teaching segmentation

patterns as well as potential audiences tied to some very specific marketing plans on how to

convince identified audiences to use our services.

References

Bachman, G. (2000). Brainstorming deluxe. Training and Development, 54 (1), 15–17.

Beachham, W., Hise, R. T., & Tongren, H. N. (Eds.) (1986). Market segmentation. In: Beacham’s market-

ing reference: Vol. 1. Account executive-market segmentation (pp. 505–509). Washington, DC: Research

Publishing.

Bennett, P. D. (Ed.) (1995). Market segmentation. In: Dictionary of marketing terms (pp. 165–166). Lincoln-

wood, IL: NTC Business Books.

Clegg, B. (1999). Creativity and innovation for managers. Boston: Butterworth-Heinemann.

Heimer, C. L. (1999). The planning roundabout a five-part series. Management Accounting, 77 (2), 26–28.

Retrieved February 1, 2002 from ProQuest (ABI/Inform Global) database.

Hurt, F. (2000). Beyond Brainstorming: putting your ideas to the test. Successful Meetings, 49 (7), 81–82.

Retrieved January 17, 2002 from ProQuest (ABI/Inform Global) database.

Morton, L. (1998/1999). Segmentation publics: an introduction. Public Relations Quarterly, 43 (3), 33–34.

Osborn, A. F. (1963). Applied imagination: principles and procedures of creative problem-solving. New York:

Scribner.

Reick, D. (1999). Session five: Ah ha! Running a productive brainstorming session. Direct Marketing, 62 (7),

78–79. Retrieved January 31, 2001 from ProQuest (ABI/Inform Global) database.


Documents

Segmentation techniques for expanding a library instruction market: Evaluating and brainstorming