Improving Chat Reference Referrals Through Enhanced Communication, Empathetic Protocols, and Evidence Based Training Practices

A Review of: Saulnier Lange, J., Johnson, C., & Martin, P. (2024). Service, interrupted: Analyzing chat reference referrals. The Reference Librarian, 65(1–2), 34–58. https://doi.org/10.1080/02763877.2024.2304360 Objective – To analyze service interruptions in chat reference interactions to determine best practices for chat reference delivery and training. Design – Mixed methods analysis of chat reference transcripts using grounded theory. Setting – One large university library in the United States. Subjects – Three hundred chat reference transcripts from the period during and after COVID-19 pandemic closure, that included an identified service interruption such as a referral, deferral, or missed referral. Methods – Researchers analyzed a random sample of relevant chat reference transcripts from May 2020 to June 2022, using a standardized data collection form based on observed transcript patterns and established coding schemes from relevant studies. The analysis considered the following factors: Query type, whether a referral was warranted, frequency of disconnected chats, operator actions, referral recipients, reference strategies employed, knowledge gaps, customer service level, and patron satisfaction level. Main Results – Most service disruptions involved referrals, with reference, library account, and item requests being the most common query types. Disconnected chat rates were lower than expected. In most cases, operators either directly contacted the referred person/unit or provided contact information. They used reference strategies such as asking clarifying questions, attempting to solve the patron’s issue, ensuring correct patron contact information, and inviting additional questions before closing the conversation. Most interactions on the patron satisfaction level were labelled as “polite” (choices were: "active dissatisfaction," "polite," and "extreme gratitude/happiness"), particularly when there was an attempt by the operator to resolve the issue. Customer service level ratings were mostly “satisfactory” (choices were: "poor," "satisfactory," and "excellent"), with higher ratings associated with the use of multiple strategies. Lower ratings were linked to disinterested operators, long wait times, extended searching for information, and the absence of a reference interview. While most questions warranted referral, unwarranted referrals often stemmed from knowledge gaps, a lack of clarifying questions, or operators rushing to refer. Most referrals were directed to other library staff or to Access Services, highlighting gaps in reference operators’ knowledge better aligned with Access Services expertise. Although not measured as a variable, the results also suggested additional challenges for student operators. Conclusion – Based on the analysis, recommendations included: improving communication between Reference and Access Services staff, adding targeted canned chat responses that demonstrate empathy, providing options, managing patron expectations, and improving training to include identified best practices. Additional research is needed to assess student follow through from chat referrals.