Views on supplier generated training content
During September a quick survey was carried out looking at how Knowledge and Library Service (KLS) teams across the NHS in England are making use of training support from our main search interface suppliers – EBSCO, ProQuest and Wolters Kluwer.
Background
The survey was prompted by conversations with a number of people across the network around supplier support for building the knowledge and skills of library users on searching their interfaces. Anecdotally people were looking to this support more to address local challenges around capacity and we wanted to investigate this to inform future provision.
The existing supplier support includes live / recorded webinars, support pages, downloadable materials and elearning programmes.
A total of 51 people responded to the survey with most answering all the questions. Demographic information was not collected to keep the tool simple.
Survey results
Are NHS KLS using supplier created training materials?
Around two thirds of respondents make use of some element of supplier offerings in support of user education. The offerings from EBSCO and Wolters Kluwer were used more regularly than those from Proquest.
My preference is for materials I can (select all applicable):
The preference is to modify and localise materials and this was the most common response for those who only ticked one box. Where the quality / format is acceptable Knowledge and Library Service teams are happy to use them as is.
| Modify and localise | 41 |
| Use as is | 20 |
| Prefer to make our own | 20 |
| Other | 3 |
The need for examples from mental health as well as “hospital” healthcare was raised.
What are the priorities for supplier generated content?
Respondents were invited to rank the types of content in order of priority. The option was offered to place things in such a way as to indicate them as being of no interest but this was little used.
A high priority was placed on downloadable guides in a leaflet style format. This reflected use of these as follow up mail outs from training sessions and in support of induction. Leaflets were prioritised particularly by those who had previously declared their regular use of supplier materials.
Brief screencasts on aspects of the interface were next highest priority wise. These should have the minimum of surrounding padding – ideally they should be two minutes or under and not include marketing type information. Examples might be – walk through setting up a search alert, walk through setting up a project folder and adding items, walk through search for a known item.
Webinars divide opinion being rated both a high and low priority. Comments reflected concern about the quality of some sessions, about methods demonstrated being out of line with local practice and a lack of interactivity. They were felt to be more suitable for librarians to learn from and then reframe / cascade. It was felt unlikely end users would access webinars due to scheduling challenges and people were aware they had no way of being alerted to uptake by their users.
Why do you choose to use supplier generated training?
| Lack of local capacity (temporary) | 20 |
| Quality of materials if good | 28 |
| Lack of local capacity (permanent) | 23 |
| Lack expertise locally to create materials | 10 |
| Part of portfolio training service offer | 10 |
| Other | 4 |
Multiple answers were invited and a wide variety of combinations resulted. The answers around lack of capacity frequently appeared together.
Generally materials are felt to be good particularly where they suit the level of the session required. It was recognised that where interfaces have changed a supplier might have more current knowledge.
Other general feedback
Respondents appreciated time saved and the quality of some of the materials. E-learning was felt helpful to support asynchronous learning at users convenience.
Live sessions were felt to be too long with too much marketing material (fluff). There were concerns about the quality of some sessions.
It was recognised that the variety of interfaces is a challenge for supplier trainers who are less able to comment on the pros and cons of different interfaces.
As quite generic materials the supplier content is felt to be good for basic sessions / general awareness and induction.
Supplier knowledge of interfaces was felt to be a positive but this is undermined by variable understanding of user needs and search. With KLS staff close to their users they can provide examples that are better grounded in the work of NHS teams.
Suggestions arising from the feedback
- Provide an easy to promote page that gathers together any training materials and support
- Items should be designed with localisation in mind including space for additional logos and local contact details.
- Offer a set of basic searching leaflets with a health slant.
- Offer editable slide decks with good screen shots for reuse / as a base for local slides.
- Offer content that can be “plugged into” local work.
- Create short videos for common tasks and problems – might need to be hosted on more than one platform (Vimeo as well as YouTube).
- More “Do once and share” should happen within the NHS network around training materials.
Further work
This quick survey provides useful insight into approaches to the supplier training materials. A report detailing key elements of this feedback for suppliers has been prepared and will be shared for discussion as part of ongoing contract management.
Awareness of the range of supplier created materials was flagged as mixed and a mapping of this will be prepared and shared.
With the Knowledge and Library Hub having more NHS tailoring than the other search interfaces the need to build on the existing editable slide deck and flyer is apparent. As we plan for the new interface there will be work to ensure new versions of these and brief, practical, videos are available in good time.
Page last reviewed: 16 October 2024