Fopl market probe poll final report 2015 05-08 - v1 - dl

Market Probe
Things we need to know . . .
June 7, 2016
Stephen Abram
Executive Director, Federation of Ontario Public Libraries
Guelph Public Library

Market Probe
Measurements:
Value, Impact, and Presence
The Case of Ontario Public Libraries
Stephen Abram, MLS , FOPL Executive Director
June 7, 2016

Market Probe 3
Planning Together
At our Libraries 2020 Summit we identified:
• What we didn’t know!
• And what was that?
• What were our priorities?
At our Libraries 2025 Summit we confirmed:
• Our next set of priorities.
3

Market Probe 4
So we cooperated and pulled our sleeves up . . .
• Starting in a hole – a previous government had cut the provincial library grant by
50%
• Yuck – hand wringing and whining and then we adapted.
• We convinced the provincial government to invest $18 million in all systems
• This year we accessed another $10 million in research and innovation grants
4

Market Probe 5
We didn’t know enough!
• What are our numbers longitudinally?
• What are our proofs of impact? (schools, children’s
programs, summer reading, economic, new
Canadians, etc. etc.)
• How do our ‘places’ need to change?
• How do we develop staff at scale?
• What does the public think?
• What motivates politicians and civil servants?
• What is our brand and how do we cost-effectively
access all Ontarians?
5

Market Probe 6
What did we need?
• Measurement not just data/statistics
• The identification of Ontario, National and international core data
• The identification of core operational measures for libraries
• The identification of core digital measures for libraries
• The identification of comparative measures for libraries and appropriate
cohort analyses
• The study of visual representation of library data that informs and
influences management and funding bodies
• The study of what ‘proofs’ libraries can adopt from their data to prove
and communicate the value of the public library in the 21st Century
portfolio of services and programs.
• The delineation of audiences, outputs, and needs to restrict scope
creep and overbuilding of the data engine.
6

Market Probe 7
What did FOPL do?
• Successfully lobbied the Ontario government to make the Ontario Provincial Public Library
Data Collection project open data under the provincial policy for the Open Data Initiative.
• Harvested 1996-2014 PL Data and developed a database of these data resulting in the
publishing of many reports and analyses of these data from 2001 through 2014 and the
identification of trends, creation of visuals, and communication of these data. These data
were published in library size cohorts, North and South, and for First Nations libraries as
well as for Ontario as a whole. In 2016 the intent is to make the database available to
members for strategic planning use.
• Authored a FOPL White Paper on the development of benchmarks and a comparative index
for Ontario public library systems.
• Designed, created and delivered three 2 day symposia in partnership with the iSchool at the
University of Toronto and a series of three webinars for FOPL about the use and
interpretation of library statistics as well as the creation of new comparative
• Did the 2015 Market Probe Canada public opinion poll (digital and telephone) of Ontarians
and their attitudes about Ontario’s public libraries.
• Stephen is contracted to write a book chapter on these projects and value measures for
public libraries in 2016.
• Stephen has sat on the University of Toronto’s iSchool Dean’s Council for over 20 years
including advising on the recent development of a Big Data program.
7

Market Probe
Selected Highlights of What we Now Know
8

Market Probe 15
Summary Data for The Decade
• 1.2 BILLION Circulation
• 6.0 Billion Budget
• 542 Million spent on Materials
• 115 Million spent on Electronic Materials
• 1.6 Million total Programs
• 31 Million total Attendance
15

Market Probe 16
19%
15%
15%
16%
10%
12%
12%
9%
9%
7%
36%
35%
35%
29%
33%
27%
26%
26%
24%
24%
55%
50%
49%
44%
44%
39%
38%
35%
33%
31%
Very Likely Somewhat Likely Total
Interest in new library service concepts varies, in
many cases based on age
A program that allows people to try out the newest tech devices
or applications, such as 3D printers or laser cutters
Library kiosks located throughout the community where people
can check out books, movies or music without having to go to
the library itself
A personalized online account that gives you recommendations
based on your past library activity
A cell phone app that allows you to access library services from
your mobile phone
An online research service where you could pose questions and
get responses from librarians
A cell phone app that helps you locate material easily in the
library using GPS
E-book readers already loaded with the book you want to read
Instruction on how to use handheld reading devices and tablets
Classes on how to download library e-books to handheld
devices
A digital media lab where you could create and upload new
digital content like your own movies or e-books
Likelihood of Using Different Library Services
64% 46%
57% 39%
61% 39%
62% 24%
43% 37%
54% 19%
45% 34%
31% 40%
30% 38%
42% 21%
By Age
18-34 55+

Market Probe 17
FOPL Mission
• Collaborative body offering one loud voice for all Ontario Public Libraries based
on agreed cooperative strategies, and priorities and research.
17

Market Probe 18
FOPL Positioning
• Simply put: Ontario’s Public Libraries. Now more than ever
before, they play a critical role in the social, educational,
cultural and economic success of the communities in our
province.
• Public Libraries are an essential investment in the future of
our communities and are essential drivers of success in
school preparedness, reading readiness, economic and
employment success, and social equity.
• As the development of the knowledge economy
progresses, public libraries are a vital link for every
resident and every community to ensure success of all
Ontarians, regardless of location or background.
18

Market Probe 19
CAN WE TELL THE STORY?
Can we prove it?
19

Market Probe 20
FOPL Talking Points Need Proofs
The Public Library value proposition is strong and includes (but isn’t limited to):
– Excellent Return on Investment
– Strong Economic Development
– Great Employment Support
– Welcoming New Canadians
– Provable Early Literacy Development
– Ongoing Support for Formal Education and Homework Help
– Serve the whole community equitably
– Affordable access to community resources
– Access to Government Services and e-government
– Questions Deserve Quality Answers
– Support Cultural Vitality
– Recognized and Valued Leisure Activities for majority of Ontarians
20

Market Probe 21
The Secret?
• Collaboration, coordination, cooperation
• All organizations started to work as one.
• FOPL, SOLS, OLS-North, CULC, OLA (OPLA and OLBA), consortia, etc.
• We shared the load(s)!
21

Market Probe 22
Marketing
• Updated a full public opinion poll in 2015 of all
Ontario residents
• Studied successful and unsuccessful campaigns in
libraries
• Did a census of all 304 systems social media and
website presences
• Surveyed CAOs about perceptions and budgets
• Developing tagline with person-on-the-street
interviews
22

Market Probe 23
What Public Libraries Say They Mean - Missions

Market Probe 24
Progress: Marketing and Branding
• Full Ontario inventory of web and social media of ALL
public libraries
• Person-on-the-street interviews to develop province-
wide tagline in 2016
• Building an Open Media Desk and social media
dashboard to entire sector in province
• Hiring 3-4 part-time journalists to build articles, social
media, and video at critical mass
• Release, release, release
• Build a media culture of good not perfect
24

Market Probe 25
Ontario Public Library Usage and Visits at an All Time
High!
• More than 99% of Ontarians live in communities served by a public
library and 74% used their library in the past year.
• Ontario libraries have nearly 31 million volumes in circulation. That’s
equivalent to 2.3 books for every Ontarian.
• In 2014 Ontario public libraries
– circulated 131 million items.
– received almost 72 million in-person visits
– provided 203,964 programs with over 3.3 million attendees
• served the public through 1,157 library service points (main libraries,
library branches, deposit stations and bookmobile stops)
• Every library branch in the province provides access to electronic
information through the Internet.
25

Market Probe 26
• When FOPL speaks we can point to the fact that we represent nearly all of
Ontario’s population of library members. This is, indeed, at the riding level.
• There are few exceptions.
26

Market Probe 27
Building the Case for Influence
• We must increase our access to government decision-
making.
• In 2014/5 FOPL:
– Submission to the Minister of Finance’s Pre-budget Consultation 2016
– Submitted Cabinet level documents on Ontario’s Culture Strategy,
Community Hubs, Municipal Act consultations. . .
– Co-planned and implemented the second annual large scale Library
Day at Queen’s Park
– Co-planned an all day symposium of over 10 ministries with over 150
civil servants and librarians / trustees
– Met regularly with our ‘minister’ and key staff on issues like the OLCF,
CDF, Open Data, Ministry Awards, operating grants, OPLW, etc.
– Contracted for legal opinions on legislative changes
27

Market Probe 28
Selected Key Results
1. Libraries are now mentioned in all critical government policy
documents
2. Attendance at Programs can exceed 25,000+ for some in a day!
3. OLA coordinates reading programs at the provincial level (TD
Summer Reading, First of Trees)
4. We have agreed provincial competencies for all positions and
technology infrastructure for professional development
5. We are investing in VIP marketing that is cost-effective and based in
research
6. We are focused on community-led strategic planning, investments in
advanced technology infrastructure and training
7. We know our numbers, demographics and are investing in R&D for
qualitative data
8. We are aligning with government ‘language’ and priorities
28

FEDERATION OF ONTARIO PUBLIC
LIBRARIES RESEARCH
Prepared for: Federation of Ontario Public Libraries Research Task Force
April, 2015
Market Probe

Market Probe 30
Table of Contents
Executive Summary 3
Background and Methodology 8
Results from the Telephone Survey 13
Use of the Public Library 14
Use of Alternative Information Channels 28
Attitudes Toward the Public Library 37
Demographic Profile of Respondents 48
Results from the Online Survey 55
Use of the Public Library 56
Use of Alternative Information Channels 71
Attitudes Toward the Public Library 84
Demographic Profile of Respondents 96
Page

Market Probe
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Market Probe

Market Probe 32
Executive Summary
• Ontarians’ overall opinions of the public library and the value it contributes to the
communities it serves remain very strong.
– The public library’s position relative to other municipal tax-supported services is
consistent with the findings from five years ago, and reactions to positioning statements
included in the previous study have actually improved slightly.
– Reacting to new positioning statements tested this year, most Ontarians acknowledge
the public library’s role in advancing literacy, equal opportunity, and quality of life in their
communities.
– The value of certain services (early literacy programs, services to new Canadians,
information for the unemployed, training in how to access information online, and being
a focal point or meeting place within the community) has increased over the past five
years.
– A majority of Ontario residents feel that if their local library were to close, it would have
a major impact on their community (but usually less of an impact on themselves and
their family).

Market Probe 33
Executive Summary
• Numbers of library users have stayed relatively consistent, but usage patterns
have changed significantly over the past five years.
– The proportion of adults not using the public library at all in the previous 12 months has
not risen over the last 15 years, in spite of the fact that information has become
increasingly available from other sources.
– Individuals’ library card ownership has increased since 2010, however there are signs
that library usage at a household level may be softening slightly.
– In-person library visit frequency has not changed since the first year the study was
conducted, but 2015 represents the first time that the number of people using the library
both online and in-person during the past year has overtaken the number of in-person-
only visitors.
– People appear to be more selective in choosing which library services to take advantage
of, as reported usage of many library services is down significantly versus five years ago
(wireless network access being the main exception).

Market Probe 34
Executive Summary
• Evolving technology, channel, and media preferences will require the public
library to review its strategies and tactics on a regular basis.
– It has become clear that electronic access is complementing, not replacing, bricks and
mortar establishments, implying that duplication of hard copy and electronic materials,
as well as increased channel costs, are likely to continue for the foreseeable future.
– Perhaps equally daunting is the need to ensure compatibility with an ever expanding
array of devices being used to access the Internet (and particularly challenging to
libraries, the substitution of multi-purpose tablets and smartphones for single-purpose
devices like e-readers).
• Effectively communicating information about new services will be as critical as
deciding which to invest in.
– While still important, traditional library services, such as lending materials and helping
people find information, are not increasing in usage or perceived value.
– Interest in new service concepts is fragmented, meaning hard decisions will need to be
made about which to develop and roll out, and for which audiences.
– New services will need to be publicized as they become available, and in many
instances, communications will have to be geared to relevant segments to create
sufficient awareness, interest, and take-up.
– Since email is clearly the preferred method of receiving information about the library,
creation of user groups and maintenance of contact lists will likely become critical in
order to reach segments of interest and establish an ongoing dialogue with users.

Market Probe 35
Executive Summary
• The future of the public library remains uncertain and must be shaped according
to the needs of a new generation of users.
– Older people will undoubtedly continue to value the library for its heritage and social
value, but those feelings will not automatically be passed down to a younger generation
that likely has different views of public institutions, not to mention unique information
needs and media habits.
– Not every library can afford to be all things to all residents of the community it serves, so
there may be a need to develop specific capabilities centrally or in selected locations,
along with the means of delivering them on a more universal basis.
– Finally, the library needs to address a challenge that was identified when this study was
first conducted and which still remains in 2015 – how to convince more people that the
public library can be of as much value to them personally as they think it is to others.

Market Probe
BACKGROUND AND METHODOLOGY
Market Probe

Market Probe 37
Research Objectives
• This represents the fourth wave of a study that has been conducted every five
years since 2000.
• Consistent with past waves, objectives of this year’s study were to:
– Understand Ontario residents’ opinions about the use, role and impact of public libraries,
and how those opinions have changed over time;
– Separate public opinion by level of usage of public libraries (including non-use); and
– Identify areas of strength and weakness for the public library.
• Results will be used to:
– Monitor the status of the library;
– Formulate strategy to ensure libraries remain a relevant and useful part of the
community;
– Identify priorities for 2015-2017; and
– Provide input to the creation of a new marketing communication plan.

Market Probe 38
Method
• A dual telephone/online method was used for the 2015 study. The telephone survey
replicated the procedures used previously and provides a basis for comparing to past results.
The new online survey component establishes a viable baseline for future research, given the
technological changes that are impacting not only the public library, but also the research
industry.
• For both survey components, quotas were set by age and gender using Statistics Canada
population figures; data is therefore unweighted.
• For the purposes of analyzing results, six Ontario regions were defined by postal code, as
follows:
Northern (P) Metro Toronto (M)
Eastern (K) GTA Urban (L within GTA)
Southwestern (N) GTA Ex-urban (L outside GTA)

Market Probe 39
Method
Telephone Survey Component
• A total of 600 telephone interviews were conducted with Ontario adults from February 26th to
March 16th, 2015. Sampling was conducted such that all Ontario households with a landline
had an equal chance of being called.
• The sample size (600) allows inferences to be made about the total Ontario adult population
with a margin of error of +4.0%, at a 95% confidence level.
• Average length of the telephone survey was 15 minutes.
• Respondents were given a choice of completing the survey in English (96%) or French (4%).
Those who speak other languages were excluded (approximately 7% of households
contacted).
Online Survey Component
• A total of 1,102 online surveys were conducted with Ontario adults from March 5th to March
10th, 2015. Respondents were sourced using Delvinia’s AskingCanadians online panel.
• On average, respondents took 13 minutes to complete the online survey.
• Respondents were given a choice of completing the survey in English (92%) or French (8%).

Market Probe 40
Reading the Charts
66% in the total
population, but 81%
among library
cardholders
• Many of the charts contain profiling information for a key variable, which is indicated by a blue
arrow pointing away from it toward a sidebar. In the chart below, the key variable is the
percentage of respondents who said they used the public library in the past year (66%). The
sidebar shows the same statistic within specific groups. For example, the first category break
in the sidebar shows that the percentage who have visited the library among those who are
cardholders is 81%, while among non-cardholders it is 25%.
• Throughout the report, a red circle or square indicates that a 2015 observation is
significantly higher or lower, respectively, than the previous survey. Bold text within sidebars
indicates that, for 2015, the bolded subgroups’ results are significantly higher than one or more
of the non-bolded groups’ results.
66%
34%
66%
34%
66%
34%
68%
32%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Yes
No
Cardholder
Yes 81
No 25
Bookstore Use
None 53
1-10 times 65
11+ times 75
Library vs. Bookstore Usage
More 97
Same 85
Less 41
68%
32%
65%
35%
65%
35%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Yes
No
2015
2010
2005
2000

Market Probe
RESULTS FROM THE TELEPHONE SURVEY
Market Probe

USE OF THE PUBLIC LIBRARY
Market Probe

Market Probe 43
Library Cardholders
Q.1
Base: All respondents (2000 - 1007; 2005 - 1102; 2010 - 1100; 2015 - 600).
*Notable for lack of difference.
73%
26%
68%
32%
65%
35%
65%
35%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Yes
No
• Compared to previous study waves, there has been an increase in the number of Ontarians claiming to be cardholders.
• The desire to have Internet access, both to and while at the library, may be promoting increased card usage.
• Interestingly, cardholder incidence does not vary significantly across the different age groupings.
In-Person Library Use
None 40%
1-10 times 85%
11+ times 96%
Social Media Interaction with Library
Yes 84%
No 72%
Bookstore Use
None 65%
1-10 times 73%
11+ times 78%
Age*
18-24 77%
25-34 72%
35-54 73%
55+ 72%
Access Library by Phone / Text
Yes 93%
No 67%
Access Library by Internet
Yes 92%
No 59%
Have Internet Access
None 66%
Work 72%
Home 74%
School 80%
Library 93%
Other 76%
Books Read in Past Year
None 47%
1-5 63%
6-15 80%
16+ 84%
Library vs Bookstore Usage
More 97%
Same 88%
Less 52%
Library Benefits
Top 84%
Middle 70%
Bottom 52%
Children in Home
Yes 78%
No 70%
Education
High school 65%
Univ/college 77%
Grad school 68%
Region
North 62%
East 68%
Southwest 81%
Metro T.O. 74%
GTA Urban 75%
GTA Ex-urban 69%
68%
32%
65%
35%
65%
35%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Yes
No
2015
2010
2005
2000

Market Probe 44
Past Year In-Person Use of Public Library
Q.2
• As has been the case since 2005, two-thirds of Ontarians report visiting the library in person within the last year.
• In-person use of the library skews to younger age groups and those with higher education, and appears to be more
prevalent in Southwest Ontario.
66%
34%
66%
34%
66%
34%
68%
32%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Yes
No
Cardholder
Yes 81%
No 25%
None 22%
1-5 56%
6-15 78%
16+ 79%
Bookstore Use
None 53%
1-10 times 65%
11+ times 75%
More 97%
Same 85%
Less 41%
Yes 93%
No 57%
None 48%
Work 66%
Home 68%
School 77%
Library 93%
Other 71%
Yes 93%
No 46%
Yes 86%
No 64%
Future Importance of Library
More 77%
Same 66%
Less 57%
Library Benefits
Top 79%
Middle 64%
Bottom 34%
Age
18-24 73%
25-34 71%
35-54 66%
55+ 61%
Children in Home
Yes 75%
No 61%
Education
High school 57%
Univ/college 69%
Grad school 72%
Region
North 56%
East 61%
Southwest 73%
Metro T.O. 65%
GTA Urban 69%
GTA Ex-urban 61%
68%
32%
65%
35%
65%
35%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Yes
No
2015
2010
2005
2000

Market Probe 45
Past Year Public Library In-Person Visit Frequency
Q.2
Base: Past-year public library visitors (2000 - 678; 2005 - 712; 2010 - 723; 2015 - 394).
• Despite the increased use of other channels, frequency of visiting the library in person has not changed significantly
over the past 15 years. In fact, those who access the library by electronic means are also more apt to report having
made a greater number of in-person visits.
• The percentage of library visitors who visit frequently (over 20 times in the past year) varies quite a bit by region.
26%
14%
18%
41%
27%
16%
19%
38%
26%
18%
16%
40%
28%
17%
18%
37%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
21+ times
11 to 20 times
6 to 10 times
1 to 5 times
Cardholder
Yes 29%
No 8%
None 21%
1-5 8%
6-15 14%
16+ 41%
More 44%
Same 17%
Less 5%
Yes 39%
No 20%
Yes 34%
No 16%
Yes 39%
No 25%
More 34%
Same 25%
Less 20%
Library Benefits
Top 35%
Middle 21%
Bottom 9%
Region
North 32%
East 21%
Southwest 32%
Metro T.O. 34%
GTA Urban 17%
GTA Ex-urban 29%
68%
32%
65%
35%
65%
35%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Yes
No
2015
2010
2005
2000

Market Probe 46
23%
16%
14%
12%
4%
19%
13%
13%
10%
12%
7%
10%
7%
18%
11%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Consult a librarian
Renew an item
Reserve an item
Enquire / request
changes to account
Past Year Use of Public Library by Telephone / Text
Q.4/7
*Wording changed in 2015 from “Telephone” to “Telephone / Text”.
Telephone / Text*
Gender
Male 18%
Female 28%
Age
18-24 15%
25-34 18%
35-54 22%
55+ 29%
• With this year’s addition of texting in the question wording, more Ontarians in 2015 indicate they have contacted the
library in the past using their phone.
• The fact that phone access tends to be more prevalent among seniors suggests that voice calls likely still outnumber
text messages by a wide margin.
68%
32%
65%
35%
65%
35%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Yes
No
2015
2010
2005
2000
Telephone = 22%
Text = 2%

Market Probe 47
Past Year Use of Public Library’s Website
Times Accessed Library’s Website
in Past Year
Q.3
Base: All respondents (2005 - 1102; 2010 - 1100; 2015 - 600).
Any Access of Library’s Website
• Over the past five years, there has been a significant increase in the number of Ontarians accessing the public library by
Internet, as well as in the percentage of those frequently accessing the library that way.
• Incidence of accessing the library by Internet increases with frequency of in-person visits, suggesting that Internet
access is a complement to, not a replacement for, more traditional library usage.
17%
25%
58%
12%
22%
66%
9%
28%
63%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
11 or more times
1 to 10 times
Not at all
Cardholder
Yes 53%
No 12%
None 9%
1-10 times 49%
11+ times 75%
Bookstore Use
None 28%
Any 45%
Yes 62%
No 36%
Yes 75%
No 39%
More 69%
Same 57%
Less 22%
Education
High school 30%
Univ/college 47%
Grad school 50%

Market Probe 48
42%
30%
24%
26%
14%
14%
10%
5%
34%
25%
21%
23%
12%
5%
4%
33%
14%
14%
13%
7%
2%
8%
5%
2%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Check catalogue
Renew an item
Reserve an item
Access other materials
via library's website
Download an item
Manage / make
changes to library account
Consult a librarian by
e-mail, chat or IM
Past Year Use of Public Library by Internet
Q.3/8a
Internet Community Size
<30K 29%
30K - <500K 38%
500K+ 49%
Region
North 22%
East 41%
Southwest 40%
Metro T.O. 55%
GTA Urban 44%
GTA Ex-urban 42%
• In addition to the general increase in use of the public library via Internet, more Ontario residents are checking library
catalogues online and downloading items.
• Geographic differences suggest that availability of high speed Internet may be impacting online usage of the library in
certain parts of the province.
68%
32%
65%
35%
65%
35%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Yes
No
2015
2010
2005
2000

Market Probe 49
14%
86%
12%
88%
7%
93%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Yes
No
• In 2015, a modest gain has been made in library users obtaining materials via the library’s website, with fictional
E-books rising significantly in popularity.
• Compared to previous study waves, reported use of E-audiobooks has tended to level off, while accessing of the
library’s E-local history or genealogy information has gradually been declining over the past 10 years.
59%
48%
34%
30%
24%
23%
22%
21%
40%
37%
27%
26%
43%
41%
39%
31%
36%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
E-books fiction
E-books non-fiction
Digital movies
E-audiobooks
E-local history or
genealogy information
Digital music
E-newspapers
or journal articles*
E-magazines
2015
2010
2005
Specific Types of Electronic Resources
Used on Library’s Website
Q.8a/b
Base: All respondents (2005 - 1102; 2010 - 1100; 2015 - 600); those who accessed electronic materials on library’s web page (2005 - 62; 2010 - 134;
2015 - 86).
*Wording changed in 2015 from “E-periodicals, E-newspapers or journal articles”.
Accessed Materials via the
Library’s Website

Market Probe 50
Ways Users Access the Public Library
Q.2/3/4
Base: Library users (2010 - 757; 2015 - 417).
37%
1% 1%
13%
12%
In-Person
Internet
Phone
33%
2%
• The diagrams below depict all past-year library users according to their reported methods of accessing the library.
• While in-person only visitors constituted the largest group of library users in 2010, they have been outnumbered by
combined in-person/Internet users in 2015.
• The proportion of library patrons using all three access methods has also increased over the last five years, while the
total percentage visiting the library in person remains extremely high, at 94%.
27%
1% 1%
20%
11%
In-Person
Internet
Phone
36%
3%
2015 2010

Market Probe 51
Past Year Public Library Interaction Through Social Media
Q.4c
Base: All respondents (2015 - 600).
New question in 2015.
• Only 7% of the general public claims to have interacted with the public library through social media in the past year.
This figure tends to double among younger adults and those with children in the home (as well as among frequent in-
person visitors and those who access the library by Internet).
None 3%
1-10 times 7%
11+ times 13%
Yes 13%
No 3%
Age
18-24 14%
25-34 14%
35-54 6%
55+ 4%
Children in Home
Yes 13%
No 5%
7%92%
2015
Yes
No

Market Probe 52
49%
26%
22%
8%
50%
31%
23%
8%
47%
27%
19%
7%
51%
24%
17%
9%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Children
Spouse/partner
Others
Past Year Use of Public Library by
Other Household Members
Q.5a/b
Used by Others (net)
• After rising in 2010, the reported incidence of children using the public library has declined significantly in 2015
(although some of the reason for this could be due to slight wave-over-wave changes in household composition).
• Family usage of the library increases with education level and is more prevalent among medium and higher income
households.
68%
32%
65%
35%
65%
35%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Yes
No
2015
2010
2005
2000
Cardholder
Yes 55%
No 31%
None 24%
1-10 times 58%
11+ times 66%
Bookstore Use
None 30%
Any 53%
More 63%
Same 64%
Less 40%
Yes 62%
No 45%
Yes 69%
No 34%
Library Benefits
Top 53%
Middle 51%
Bottom 34%
Age
18-24 51%
25-34 64%
35-54 54%
55+ 36%
Children in Home
Yes 75%
No 36%
Education
High school 40%
Univ/college 52%
Grad school 62%
Income
<$35K 28%
$35K - <$75K 52%
$75K+ 59%

Market Probe 53
Total Usage of the Public Library
No One
21%
Other
Household
Member(s)
Only
10%
With Others in
Household
41%
Respondent
Only
28%
Q.2/3/4
Base: All respondents (2010 - 1100; 2015 - 600).
Total Users
= 69%
• Taking the total population into account and comparing with 2010, the most notable differences in usage are a slight
increase in library non-user households and a corresponding decrease in households where the respondent didn’t use
the library but others in the household did.
• As was the case five years ago, over three-quarters of Ontario households are using the public library, and the majority
of households that are using the library contain more than one user.
No One
24%
Other
Household
Member(s)
Only
7%
With Others in
Household
42%
Respondent
Only
27%
Total Users
= 70%
2015 2010

Market Probe 54
84%
56%
34%
28%
26%
25%
23%
23%
16%
14%
10%
90%
70%
41%
33%
26%
17%
33%
23%
13%
21%
16%
88%
73%
38%
31%
32%
18%
9%
21%
16%
88%
77%
47%
19%
32%
17%
9%
24%
18%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%Q.6a/b
Base: Those who personally visited the public library (2000 - 678; 2005 - 713; 2010 - 723; 2015 - 394); households where
anyone used the public library (2010 - 843; 2015 - 444). *Wording changed in 2015 from “Access electronic databases.”
Reasons for Personally Using the Public Library
• Many of the more traditional reasons for using libraries were less often cited versus five years ago, with only the library’s
wireless network generating more traffic. Given that this was a multiple mention question, it may be that today’s library
users are becoming more selective in determining which library services they choose to use.
Borrow books, CDs, DVDs or
other materials
Get information on a topic of
personal interest
Read or study
Access the Internet using library
computers
Relax or socialize
Use the library's wireless
network
Access databases / other
electronically stored info*
Take a child to a program or
activity
Attend a lecture, program,
meeting or training session
Work assignment or keep up-to-
date at work
School or class assignment
86%
59%
44%
35%
31%
31%
27%
25%
18%
21%
27%
Total Household
(2015)
68%
32%
65%
35%
65%
35%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Yes
No
2015
2010
2005
2000

Market Probe 55
by Frequency of Library Use (Current Year)
Q.6a
Base: Frequent library users (2015 - 161); infrequent users (2015 - 233).
93%
65%
37%
35%
31%
31%
29%
26%
21%
7%
14%
78%
50%
33%
24%
22%
21%
18%
21%
13%
12%
15%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
other materials
personal interest
Read or study
Access the Internet using
library computers
Relax or socialize
network
electronically stored info
activity
Work assignment or keep
up-to-date at work
More than 10 past year in-person visits
1 to 10 past year in-person visits
• In 2015, more frequent visits to the library were associated with borrowing materials, gathering information on topics of
interest, Internet/wireless/database access, and participation in library programs.

Market Probe
USE OF ALTERNATIVE INFORMATION CHANNELS
Market Probe

Market Probe 57
6%
5%
3%
3%
4%
4%
1%
11%
4%
1%
5%
7%
4%
2%
2%
6%
7%
2%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Due to illness /
injury / too old
No reason /
don't know
Prefer to buy /
share books
Library hours
not convenient
Have own
library / books
Total Reasons for Not Using the Public Library
in the Past Year
Q.9a/b
Base: Past-year public library non-users (2000 - 326; 2005 - 389; 2010 - 343; 2015 - 183).
Note: Mentions of 3% or more only. May total more than 100%, due to multiple mentions.
Yes 57%
No 26%
Bookstore Use
None 25%
Any 58%
None 38%
1-5 52%
6-15 66%
16+ 56%
Education
High school 33%
Univ/college 62%
Grad school 56%
Income
<$35K 39%
$35K - <$75K 43%
$75K+ 65%
Community Size
<30K 40%
35K - <500K 41%
500K+ 62%
• Availability of information from other sources has become the primary reason for not using the public library, with
Internet and bookstore usage strongly linked to this explanation.
• Those with higher education and higher incomes are also more apt to offer this rationale for non-use.
50%
30%
21%
8%
7%
6%
40%
34%
27%
9%
10%
6%
21%
25%
26%
7%
3%
6%
22%
30%
21%
12%
8%
6%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Get information
from other sources
Not interested
Too busy
Don't read
Library isn't
accessible
Use library at
school or work
68%
32%
65%
35%
65%
35%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Yes
No
2015
2010
2005
2000

Market Probe 58
Experience Using the Library
Q.9d/e/f
Base: Past-year non-users of library (191); All users of library (586); Had a negative library experience (32). New questions in 2015.
• Over 90% of those who haven’t used the public library in the past year have done so sometime in the past.
• Relatively few Ontarians who have ever used the public library claim to have had a negative experience when doing so.
For the few who did, fines, materials not being available, and unhelpful staff were the main complaints.
Type of Negative Experience
Materials / books not available 16%
I owe penalty fees 16%
Staff aren’t friendly / helpful 13%
It’s overcrowded 9%
Have to pay access fee to services 6%
Not enough computers 6%
Difficulties with computers / forgot pin # 6%
Poor hours 3%
Materials / books are damaged / ripped 3%
Other 16%
91%9%
Yes (%)
No (%)
Ever used the public library
Had a negative experience
5%95%
Yes (%)
No (%)
Bookstore Use
None 81%
Any 94%
Gender
Male 86%
Female 96%

Market Probe 59
87%
83%
44%
42%
41%
23%
17%
88%
83%
50%
23%
26%
21%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
At home
At work
At other places in the
community using a
smartphone
community using
wireless access
At your public library
At school
2015
2010
Ways Internet Was Accessed in the Past Year
Q.10
Change of wording in 2010 makes comparisons to earlier data invalid.
Any access
• Incidence of having Internet access, in general and in the home, has remained constant during the last five years, with
access at work and at school declining somewhat.
• Over this same time period, wireless access has shown a substantial increase.
• Respondents under the age of 25 are one of the library’s biggest Internet user groups.
Cardholder
Yes 29%
No 6%
None 4%
1-10 times 29%
11+ times 38%
Yes 32%
No 20%
Yes 41%
No 21%
Bookstore Use
None 15%
Any 24%
None 11%
1-5 20%
6-15 28%
16+ 26%
More 34%
Same 38%
Less 11%
Library Benefits
Top 26%
Middle 23%
Bottom 15%
More 29%
Same 23%
Less 19%
Age
18-24 38%
25-34 23%
35-54 23%
55+ 17%
Children in Home
Yes 19%
No 30%
Region
North 11%
East 22%
Southwest 24%
Metro T.O. 29%
GTA Urban 25%
GTA Ex-urban 19%

Market Probe 60
• With the exception of social networking, which has seen a significant increase, the ways in which the Internet is used
haven’t changed much over the last five years.
85%
84%
75%
65%
55%
42%
42%
32%
16%
86%
84%
78%
43%
18%
82%
78%
75%
67%
63%
57%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Search for specific
information of interest
Use e-mail, a chat room or IM
To access the news
To access social networking
sites
To stream movies, music or
other types of entertainment
To download movies, music or
To download books or
magazines*
To create content
Use of Internet
Q.11
*Change of wording in 2015 makes comparisons to earlier data invalid.
Regular Use of
Internet
Children in Home
Yes 95%
No 80%
Education
High School 64%
Univ/college 93%
Grad school 98%
Income
<$35K 62%
$35K - <$75K 83%
$75K+ 97%
Community Size
<30K 77%
30K - <500K 82%
500K+ 90%
Region
North 80%
East 87%
Southwest 74%
Metro T.O. 88%
GTA Urban 93%
GTA Ex-urban 88%
None 78%
Any 89%
Yes 95%
No 78%
Social Media Interaction
with Library
Yes 93%
No 85%
More 83%
Same 86%
Less 91%
Library Benefits
Top 81%
Middle 87%
Bottom 91%
Age
18-24 97%
25-34 95%
35-54 91%
55+ 71%
68%
32%
65%
35%
65%
35%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Yes
No
2015
2010
2005
2000
Age
18-24 73%
25-34 72%
35-54 56%
55+ 40%

Market Probe 61
Books Read in the Past Year
Q.13f
Base: All respondents (2015 - 600). New question in 2015.
• The vast majority of Ontarians claim to have read one or more books during the past year, with the largest group
reading 16 or more.
• Older people tend to be more avid readers than the younger age groups.
85%
40%
24%
21%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
16+ books read
6 to 15 books read
1 to 5 books read
2015
Any Books Read
None 24%
1-10 times 33%
11+ times 70%
Yes 64%
No 38%
More 63%
Same 39%
Less 33%
Library Benefits
Top 53%
Middle 34%
Bottom 23%
Age
18-24 24%
25-34 35%
35-54 40%
55+ 47%
Education
High school 33%
Univ/college 40%
Grad school 55%
Born in Canada
Yes 38%
No 49%
Region
North 38%
East 43%
Southwest 43%
Metro T.O. 45%
GTA Urban 31%
GTA Ex-urban 39%

Market Probe 62
Format of Books Read in the Past Year
Q.13g
Base: Read any books in the past year (2015 - 507). New question in 2015.
• Hard copy books remain the most popular format.
• Those who prefer E-books are more likely to be bookstore users and to have not visited the public library in person in
the past year.
11%
74%
14%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Mostly in electronic
format
Mostly in hard copy
Both equally
2015 In-Person Library Use
None 20%
Any 8%
More 8%
Same 8%
Less 16%
Bookstore Use
None 5%
Any 12%
Age
18-24 10%
25-34 6%
35-54 11%
55+ 13%
Education
High school 9%
Univ/college 10%
Grad school 21%
Region
North 13%
East 11%
Southwest 7%
Metro T.O. 12%
GTA Urban 16%
GTA Ex-urban 5%

Market Probe 63
Cardholder
Yes 28%
No 20%
None 19%
1-10 times 24%
11+ times 37%
None 6%
1-5 13%
6-15 23%
16+ 42%
More 23%
Same 32%
Less 38%
Library Benefits
Top 32%
Middle 22%
Bottom 25%
• Bookstore usage has remained quite consistent since 2005.
• As was the case five years ago, frequent bookstore usage is associated with higher usage of, and support for, the public
library system.
Past Year Bookstore Visit Frequency
Q.14a
26%
21%
37%
17%
25%
21%
38%
16%
27%
22%
34%
16%
34%
22%
31%
12%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
More than 10 times
6 to 10 times
1 to 5 times
None
68%
32%
65%
35%
65%
35%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Yes
No
2015
2010
2005
2000
Education
High school 13%
Univ/college 28%
Grad school 58%
Income
<$35K 16%
$35K - <$75K 24%
$75K+ 34%
Community Size
<30K 20%
30K - <500K 22%
500K+ 32%
Region
North 18%
East 30%
Southwest 14%
Metro T.O. 40%
GTA Urban 26%
GTA Ex-urban 30%

Market Probe 64
42%
26%
29%
3%
43%
28%
28%
1%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Bookstores more
About the same
Libraries more
Don't know
2015
2010
Frequency of Visiting Bookstore vs. Library
Q.14b
Base: Past-year bookstore users (2010 - 921, 2015 - 501).
Cardholder
Yes 29%
No 78%
None 77%
1-10 times 37%
11+ times 7%
More 31%
Same 39%
Less 55%
Library Benefits
Top 26%
Middle 44%
Bottom 74%
• Over half of Ontario’s bookstore users say they are using libraries as much or more than bookstores.
• Those who use bookstores more tend to not only use, but also value, libraries less.
Age
18-24 33%
25-34 52%
35-54 42%
55+ 39%
Income
<$35K 30%
$35K - <$75K 38%
$75K+ 50%
Language
English 43%
French / Other 26%
Region
North 50%
East 42%
Southwest 30%
Metro T.O. 42%
GTA Urban 44%
GTA Ex-urban 50%

ATTITUDES TOWARD THE PUBLIC LIBRARY
Market Probe

Market Probe 66
Opinion of Future Importance of Public Libraries
Q.15
Cardholder
Yes 26%
No 23%
None 17%
1-10 times 27%
11+ times 36%
Yes 38%
No 22%
Yes 32%
No 21%
Bookstore Use
None 25%
1-10 times 23%
11+ times 33%
More 32%
Same 28%
Less 19%
Library Benefits
Top 40%
Middle 20%
Bottom 5%
Age
18-24 30%
25-34 21%
35-54 21%
55+ 32%
Income
<$35K 40%
$35K - <$75K 21%
$75K+ 26%
Community Size
<30K 24%
30K - <500K 21%
500K+ 30%
Region
North 18%
East 28%
Southwest 22%
Metro T.O. 40%
GTA Urban 20%
GTA Ex-urban 27%
• At the present time, equal numbers of Ontarians think libraries will become more important and less important as online
availability of materials increases, with the largest group predicting that there will be no change.
• Those who think the library will become more important tend to be either older or younger, have lower incomes, and live
in Metro Toronto.
26%
43%
27%
5%
23%
44%
29%
4%
27%
45%
23%
6%
27%
41%
25%
7%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
More important
No change
Less important
Don't know
2015
2010
2005
2000

Market Probe 67
• When asked theoretically about their local library closing, a large majority of respondents said that they would expect
there to be a major impact on their community.
• People in Southwest Ontario and those who use the library to access the Internet were among the groups most apt to
feel this way, while young people tended to downplay the severity of the impact.
Impact of Public Library Closing on Community
Q.16a-a
71%
21%
2%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Major Impact
Minor Impact
No Impact at all
2015
Cardholder
Yes 77%
No 54%
None 54%
1-10 times 75%
11+ times 86%
Yes 88%
No 66%
None 73%
Work 68%
Home 71%
School 69%
Library 78%
Other 69%
Yes 82%
No 63%
Yes 86%
No 70%
Bookstore Use
None 66%
1-10 times 69%
11+ times 78%
Age
18-24 56%
25-34 73%
35-54 69%
55+ 77%
Region
North 60%
East 66%
Southwest 78%
Metro T.O. 72%
GTA Urban 72%
GTA Ex-urban 72%

Market Probe 68
Impact of Public Library Closing on Family
Q.16a-b
44%
35%
21%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Major Impact
Minor Impact
No Impact at all
2015
Cardholder
Yes 53%
No 16%
None 15%
1-10 times 40%
11+ times 84%
Yes 75%
No 34%
Yes 62%
No 30%
Yes 61%
No 42%
None 44%
Work 42%
Home 43%
School 49%
Library 64%
Other 43%
Bookstore Use
None 38%
1-10 times 40%
11+ times 84%
Gender
Male 39%
Female 47%
Region
North 35%
East 41%
Southwest 50%
Metro T.O. 51%
GTA Urban 41%
GTA Ex-urban 39%
• Asked to think about the effect their local library closing might have on themselves and their family, less than half felt
that the impact would be major.
• When presented in a personal context, women and Metro Toronto residents stood out along with some of the other
groups who also thought the community as a whole would be very negatively impacted.

Market Probe 69
Benefit of Public Libraries Relative to
Other Municipal Tax-Supported Services
Q.16
Cardholder
Yes 42%
No 22%
None 21%
1-10 times 34%
11+ times 57%
None 26%
1-5 26%
6-15 31%
16+ 48%
More 54%
Same 36%
Less 23%
Yes 58%
No 29%
None 48%
Any 34%
Yes 46%
No 29%
Future Importance of Libraries
More 55%
Same 34%
Less 20%
• There has been virtually no change over the past five years in how Ontarians view the library relative to other
unspecified tax-supported services, with over three times as many respondents still saying the library belongs at the top
rather than the bottom of the list.
• The groups most likely to place the library at the top of the list include older residents, people without Internet access,
lower income earners, immigrants and Torontonians.
36%
50%
11%
3%
37%
49%
11%
3%
25%
56%
16%
4%
22%
55%
20%
3%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Top of list
Middle of list
Bottom of list
Don't know
2015
2010
2005
2000
Age
18-24 27%
25-34 31%
35-54 38%
55+ 40%
Income
<$35K 47%
$35K - <$75K 41%
$75K+ 33%
Born in Canada
Yes 34%
No 45%
Region
North 31%
East 34%
Southwest 39%
Metro T.O. 47%
GTA Urban 31%
GTA Ex-urban 34%

Market Probe 70
68
60
56
54
50
45
45
40
37
31
31
28
21
69
46
55
45
42
47
27
30
24
22
25
18
• In 2015, being a lender of materials is still the role of the library that is most valued by Ontarians, followed by early
literacy programs, which is now much more valued than it was five years ago.
• Several other services have also registered a significant increase in their perceived value but remain in the bottom half
of the list.
Perceived Value of Library Services
Q.17
*Wording changed in 2015 from “Trainer in how to access information through computers”.
9
13
15
14
17
20
18
26
31
33
35
39
45
9
22
13
21
22
16
35
33
39
44
39
46
Lender of materials
Early literacy programs
Reference centre
Provider of support for school
projects or homework
Place to study
Local history collections
Assistance in finding information
Services to new Canadians
Information for the unemployed
Trainer in how to access
info online*
Focal point or meeting place
Government services through library-
based kiosks
Resources for small business and
entrepreneurs
Bottom 6 Ratings
(1-6 on a 10-pt. scale)
Top 2 Ratings

Market Probe 71
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Value of Services by How Library Ranks
Compared to Other Municipal Tax-Supported Services
MeanScore
• The chart below presents the average value scores of the different library services according to whether the library was
placed at the top, middle or bottom of the list relative to other tax-supported services.
• The maintaining of local history collections represents the narrowest gap in value perceptions across the three groups.
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
LenderofM
aterialsReference
Centre
Assistance
in
Finding
Info
Place
to
Study
Early
Literacy
Progam
s
LocalHistory
Collections
Inform
ation
forUnem
ployed
Services
to
New
Canadians
Training
in
H
ow
to
Access
Info
G
overnm
entServices
Kiosks
M
eeting
Place
Resources
forSm
allBusiness
Library at Top of List Library in Middle of List Library at Bottom of List
Q.16/17
Base: All respondents (2010 - 1100; 2015 - 600)

Market Probe 72
64%
45%
36%
26%
26%
25%
19%
13%
12%
9%
7%
6%
4%
72%
55%
49%
25%
35%
28%
15%
13%
14%
12%
10%
8%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Past Year Usage of Library Services
by Someone in Household
Q.18
*Wording change in 2015 from “Training in how to access information through computers”.
• After being asked to rate the value of the services the library offers, respondents were then asked to indicate which of
the services had been used by someone in their household during the past year. Despite the higher value perceptions
measured in this year’s study, actual usage of most of the services has declined noticeably.
Lender of materials
Reference centre
Place to study
Help with school projects or
homework
Training in how to access information
online*
based kiosks
entrepreneurs

Market Probe 73
Value & Usage Combined
Q.17/18
• For each of the library services, the diagram below plots perceived value (percent giving the service a score of 9 or 10
on the 10-point value scale) along with reported usage.
• Value perceptions and reported usage are most aligned for being a lender of materials, providing assistance in finding
information, and serving as a focal point or meeting place.
• The widest value/usage gap is for early literacy programs, which was also the case in 2010.
0
40
80
Government services through
library-based kiosks
Reference centre
entrepreneurs
Training in how to access info online
Percent Valuing the Service Percent Using the Service
0
40
80
Assistance in Finding Information
Early Literacy Progams
Focal Point or Meeting Place
Government Services Kiosks
Information for the Unemployed
Lender of Materials
Local History CollectionsPlace to Study
Reference Centre
Resources for Small Business
Services to New Canadians
Support for School Projects or
Homework
Training in How to Access Info Online

Market Probe 74
Information Technology Training that Could Be Offered
Q.13b
*Change of question wording in 2015 makes comparisons to earlier data invalid.
Note: Table contains mentions of 3% or more. May total more than 100%, due to multiple mentions.
• Responses to an open-ended question in 2015 reveal that nearly one-third of Ontario adults think the public library
should offer general computer or Internet skills training. Others, in response to this question, identified who they thought
the most appropriate target audiences for IT training would be.
• A substantial number of respondents provided no suggestions regarding the type of technical training the library could
provide.
30%
9%
9%
6%
5%
4%
3%
3%
3%
3%
4%
42%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
2015*
Computer / Internet skills
Already do a good job
For seniors / older people
For kids / students
How to access library resources
Social networking
Anything / anything useful
Word processing / Excel / PowerPoint
Hobbies / special interests
Research skills
Other
Don't know / can't think of anything

Market Probe 75
Believability of Positioning Statements
Q.19
• Compared to 2010, there is stronger agreement that the public library is the only affordable place where the average
Ontarian can go for information and less disagreement that the public library is the best place for people of all ages to
go to pursue lifelong learning.
47
39
42
36
25
24
28
33
The public library is the only
affordable place where the average
Ontarian can go for information
The public library is the best place for
people of all ages to go to pursue
lifelong learning
Bottom 6 Ratings
Top 2 Ratings

DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE OF RESPONDENTS
Market Probe

Market Probe 77
Q.A/B
Respondent Age / Gender
Respondent Age Gender
12%
16%
38%
35%
0%
12%
16%
40%
32%
0%
12%
19%
38%
27%
4%
12%
19%
38%
27%
4%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
18 to 24
25 to 34
35 to 54
55+
Refused
68%
32%
65%
35%
65%
35%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Yes
No
2015
2010
2005
2000
Average Age
2015: 46
2010: 46
2005: 45
2000: 44
48%
52%
48%
52%
37%
63%
37%
63%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Male
Female
• Quotas placed on age and gender ensured that this year’s sample resembled that of 2010 on those two dimensions.

Market Probe 78
40%
12%
15%
11%
8%
35%
13%
15%
14%
11%
40%
18%
15%
11%
10%
36%
16%
15%
13%
10%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
5 or younger
6 to 10
11 to 14
15 to 17
Number in Household / Presence of Children in Household
Q.20/21a/b
Any Children
Number in Household Presence of Children in Household
16%
34%
48%
3%
13%
35%
50%
2%
12%
32%
54%
2%
15%
33%
50%
2%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
One
Two
Three or
more
Refused
Average Number
2015: 2.8
2010: 2.9
2005: 2.9
2000: 2.8
68%
32%
65%
35%
65%
35%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Yes
No
2015
2010
2005
2000
• Households in the 2015 study were slightly smaller than in the previous two study waves.

Market Probe 79
28%
1%
27%
70%
15%
45%
10%
25%
2%
24%
73%
18%
44%
11%
29%
2%
27%
69%
19%
41%
8%
35%
2%
32%
64%
20%
36%
7%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Elementary
school
Some / completed
high school
Some
univ/college
Graduated
univ/college
Post graduate
studies
Education / Total Annual Household Income
Q.22/24
High School
or Less
University/
College
Education Total Annual Household Income
14%
27%
35%
25%
12%
31%
35%
22%
15%
29%
22%
34%
17%
36%
21%
26%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Under $35K
$35 < $75K
$75K+
Don't know /
refused
68%
32%
65%
35%
65%
35%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Yes
No
2015
2010
2005
2000
• There were no significant differences in education or income levels compared with 2010.

Market Probe 80
Ontario Region / Community Size
Community SizeOntario Region
23%
22%
19%
16%
11%
9%
19%
23%
20%
17%
12%
8%
17%
27%
19%
17%
12%
8%
17%
23%
20%
19%
13%
8%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
GTA Urban
Southwestern
Eastern
Metro Toronto
GTA Ex-urban
Northern
17%
36%
48%
17%
35%
48%
17%
40%
44%
19%
33%
47%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Under 30K
30K < 500K
500K+
68%
32%
65%
35%
65%
35%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Yes
No
2015
2010
2005
2000
• Community size was very consistent with the distribution from the 2010 study, but there were slightly more people
residing in urban parts of the GTA this year.

Market Probe 81
Aboriginal Status / Years in Canada / Language Spoken
Q.22a/b/c/23
Base: All respondents (2000 - 1007; 2005 - 1102; 2010 - 1100; 2015 – 600); Respondents who were not born in
Canada (111). “Born in Canada”, “Years Lived in Canada” and “Aboriginal Status” are new in 2015.
94%
1%
5%
86%
3%
10%
87%
3%
9%
88%
4%
8%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
English
French
Other
Primary Language Spoken at HomeBorn in Canada
3%
5%
5%
86%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
2 years or less
3 to 5 years
6 to 10 years
More than 10
years
Years Lived in Canada
68%
32%
65%
35%
65%
35%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Yes
No
2015
2010
2005
2000
81% 19%
Yes
No
Aboriginal Status
4%
95%
Yes
No
• More English-speaking people completed the phone survey compared with the previous studies, and the vast majority of
respondents in 2015 were longtime residents of Canada.

Market Probe 82
Challenges in Using the Library
Q.23a
Base: All respondents (2015 - 600). New questions in 2015.
8%
7%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
That make
reading difficult
or challenging
That make
visiting a library
in person difficult
or challenging
Have Physical or Health Conditions…
• About equal numbers of Ontarians have physical or health conditions that make reading difficult as have conditions that
make visiting the library in person a challenge.

Market Probe
RESULTS FROM THE ONLINE SURVEY
Market Probe

Market Probe
USE OF THE PUBLIC LIBRARY
Market Probe

Market Probe 85
Characteristics of Closest Public Library
Q.1a/b
Base: All respondents (1102).
Condition of Library Distance from Home
70%
20%
5%
1%
4%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
5 kilometres or less
6 to 10 kilometres
11 to 20 kilometres
More than 20
kilometres
Don’t know
56%
28%
2%
13%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Inviting space
Okay, but could use
some improvement
Not pleasant
Never been inside
library
• Most of those who responded to the web survey live within 5 kilometres of their local library and find it to be an inviting
place.
Cardholder
Yes 75%
No 61%
None 62%
1-10 times 71%
11+ times 81%
Yes 75%
No 65%
Library Benefits
Top 78%
Middle 68%
Bottom 61%
Community Size
<30K 56%
30K - <500K 67%
500K+ 74%
Region
North 64%
East 66%
Southwest 66%
Metro T.O. 80%
GTA Urban 71%
GTA Ex-urban 66%

Market Probe 86
Library Cardholders
Q.1
• Internet research panel members were less likely to report having a library card than those surveyed by phone.
• Certain demographic groups were more likely to be cardholders than others: younger people, women, those with
children in the household, people born outside Canada, and those who reside in Metro Toronto or the GTA.
None 30%
1-10 times 79%
11+ times 99%
None 38%
1-5 63%
6-15 76%
16+ 80%
In-Person Bookstore Use
None 51%
1-10 times 71%
11+ times 72%
Online Book Vendor Use
None 59%
1-10 times 71%
11+ times 72%
Yes 89%
No 62%
Yes 88%
No 41%
Social Media Interaction with
Library
Yes 86%
No 66%
Library Benefits
Top 84%
Middle 62%
Bottom 48%
Gender
Male 63%
Female 72%
Age
18-24 75%
25-34 69%
35-54 67%
55+ 65%
Children in Home
Yes 79%
No 64%
Education
High school 55%
Univ/college 67%
Grad school 81%
Born in Canada
Yes 66%
No 73%
Region
North 60%
East 61%
Southwest 64%
Metro T.O. 69%
GTA Urban 73%
GTA Ex-urban 70%
68%31%
Yes
No

Market Probe 87
Past Year In-Person Use of Public Library
Q.2
• Despite the lower incidence of cardholders, the percentage of in-person library users was similar to the results of the
phone survey.
• Those living close to a library and in the more densely populated parts of the Toronto area were most apt to report
visiting the library in person in the past year.
Cardholder
Yes 86%
No 31%
None 23%
1-5 69%
6-15 79%
16+ 82%
None 49%
1-10 times 73%
11+ times 75%
None 58%
1-10 times 75%
11+ times 69%
Yes 97%
No 62%
None 36%
Work 70%
Home 69%
School 75%
Library 98%
Other 71%
Yes 93%
No 37%
Library
Yes 94%
No 67%
Library Benefits
Top 86%
Middle 66%
Bottom 34%
Children in Home
Yes 82%
No 65%
Education
High school 54%
Univ/college 70%
Grad school 76%
Born in Canada
Yes 66%
No 78%
Distance to Closest Public Library
<5 km 72%
6-10 km 69%
11+ km 52%
Region
North 64%
East 63%
Southwest 68%
Metro T.O. 70%
GTA Urban 74%
GTA Ex-urban 64%
69%31%
Yes
No

Market Probe 88
16%
14%
17%
53%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
21+ times
11 to 20 times
6 to 10 times
1 to 5 times
Past Year Public Library In-Person Visit Frequency
Q.2
Base: Past-year public library visitors (757).
• Web research panelists reported fewer in-person visits to the library than their phone survey counterparts.
• Numbers of visits were very different at both the upper (21+ times) and lower (1 to 5 times) ends of the scale, while in
the middle the results were very consistent with the responses obtained by phone.
• Older people and those with lower incomes tended to be the most frequent past-year visitors, as well as those having
close proximity to the library.
Cardholder
Yes 19%
No 2%
None 6%
1-5 5%
6-15 13%
16+ 32%
Yes 26%
No 12%
Work 15%
Home 16%
School 7%
Library 23%
Other 14%
Yes 20%
No 3%
Library
Yes 26%
No 15%
Library Benefits
Top 28%
Middle 9%
Bottom 0%
Age
18-24 3%
25-34 13%
35-54 16%
55+ 22%
Income
<$35K 18%
$35K - <$75K 19%
$75K+ 12%
<5 km 18%
6-10 km 13%
11+ km 9%
Region
North 16%
East 12%
Southwest 17%
Metro T.O. 22%
GTA Urban 14%
GTA Ex-urban 13%

Market Probe 89
20%
9%
9%
6%
5%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Consult a librarian
Renew an item
Reserve an item
Enquire / request
changes to account
Past Year Use of Public Library by Telephone / Text
Q.4/7
Telephone / Text
• Overall, the proportion of the Ontario adult population accessing the public library by phone or text is comparable to the
results from the phone survey; however, with the exception of account requests/changes, web panelists were less likely
to indicate the specific types of activities they conducted by phone.
Cardholder
Yes 26%
No 6%
None 2%
1-10 times 23%
11+ times 39%
None 2%
1-5 16%
6-15 25%
16+ 27%
None 12%
1-10 times 22%
11+ times 19%
None 15%
1-10 times 22%
11+ times 19%
None 9%
Work 20%
Home 19%
School 23%
Library 35%
Other 19%
Yes 30%
No 6%
Library
Yes 49%
No 17%
Library Benefits
Top 28%
Middle 17%
Bottom 6%
Age
18-24 20%
25-34 15%
35-54 23%
55+ 18%
Children in Home
Yes 27%
No 17%
Education
High school 13%
Univ/college 20%
Grad school 21%
Born in Canada
Yes 17%
No 26%
Telephone = 19%
Text = 3%

Market Probe 90
20%
37%
43%
11 or more times
1 to 10 times
Not at all
Past Year Use of Public Library’s Website
Times Accessed Library’s Website
in Past Year
Q.3
Any Access of Library’s Website
• Not surprisingly, there are fewer web panelists than phone respondents who have not made any use of the library’s
website in the past year.
• However, the percentage of frequent users (11 or more times) does not differ significantly across the two survey
populations.
Cardholder
Yes 74%
No 20%
None 13%
1-10 times 69%
11+ times 95%
None 16%
1-5 51%
6-15 66%
16+ 76%
None 41%
1-10 times 63%
11+ times 64%
None 27%
Work 57%
Home 56%
School 62%
Library 85%
Other 59%
Yes 87%
No 49%
Yes 90%
No 53%
Library Benefits
Top 74%
Middle 53%
Bottom 23%
Gender
Male 53%
Female 60%
Children in Home
Yes 67%
No 54%
Education
High school 41%
Univ/college 57%
Grad school 66%
Born in Canada
Yes 55%
No 63%
Region
North 54%
East 49%
Southwest 54%
Metro T.O. 62%
GTA Urban 60%
GTA Ex-urban 55%

Market Probe 91
57%
35%
29%
26%
14%
12%
9%
5%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Check catalogue
Reserve an item
Renew an item
Download an item
Access other materials
via library's website
Manage / make
changes to library account
Consult a librarian by
e-mail, chat or IM
Past Year Use of Public Library by Internet
Q.3/8a
Internet
• Web panel respondents were more apt than phone respondents to report using the library’s website to check
catalogues.
• For all other uses of the website, the percentages generally lined up with those of the telephone interviewees.

Market Probe 92
41%59%
Yes
No
39%
28%
15%
14%
14%
9%
8%
6%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
E-books fiction
E-books non-fiction
Digital movies
E-newspapers
or journal articles
E-magazines
E-audiobooks
Digital music
E-local history or
genealogy information
Specific Types of Electronic Resources
Used on Library’s Website
Q.8a/b
Base: All respondents (1102); those who checked the library’s online catalogue, downloaded an item,
or accessed other electronic materials on the library’s web page (449).
Checked the Library’s Online
Catalogue, Downloaded an Item,
or Accessed Other Materials via
the Library’s Website
• More web survey respondents than phone respondents said that they had checked the library’s online catalogue,
downloaded an item or accessed other materials via the library’s website.
• When this larger base size is taken into account, the proportion of the total population accessing the different electronic
media is almost identical for the two populations that were surveyed.

Market Probe 93
Ways Users Access the Public Library
Q.2/3/4a/b
Base: Library users (804).
• Higher library website usage on the part of panel respondents has made the cross-channel usage diagram below look
different from the one produced for telephone respondents.
• In particular, this diagram shows more combined in-person/Internet users and fewer combined in-person/telephone and
in-person-only users.
• The proportion of library patrons who reported using all three access methods, however, was not significantly impacted
by survey method.
19%
0% 0%
23%
3%
In-Person
Internet
Phone
49%
5%

Market Probe 94
Past Year Public Library Interaction Through Social Media
Q.4c
• Interacting with the library through social media is only slightly higher for the population surveyed by web versus phone
and, once again, skews to the younger part of the population.
9%91%
Yes
No
Cardholder
Yes 11%
No 4%
None 2%
1-10 times 11%
11+ times 14%
None 1%
1-5 8%
6-15 11%
16+ 11%
None 3%
1-10 times 9%
11+ times 16%
None 3%
1-10 times 11%
11+ times 12%
Yes 21%
No 5%
None 9%
Work 10%
Home 8%
School 12%
Library 16%
Other 10%
Yes 14%
No 2%
Library Benefits
Top 10%
Middle 9%
Bottom 4%
Age
18-24 11%
25-34 12%
35-54 9%
55+ 5%
Children in Home
Yes 13%
No 7%

Market Probe 95
45%
27%
19%
9%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Spouse/partner
Children
Others
Past Year Use of Public Library by
Other Household Members
Q.5a/b
Used by Others (net)
• Even though the percentage of respondents reporting that others in their household used the public library resembled
the figure reported in the telephone survey, the relationship of those people to the respondent was quite different, with
web respondents mentioning spouses/partners more frequently than children.
Cardholder
Yes 55%
No 23%
None 15%
1-10 times 55%
11+ times 70%
None 19%
1-5 44%
6-15 54%
16+ 51%
None 29%
1-10 times 49%
11+ times 53%
Yes 65%
No 41%
Yes 60%
No 26%
Library
Yes 76%
No 42%
Library Benefits
Top 58%
Middle 43%
Bottom 19%
Age
18-24 50%
25-34 46%
35-54 50%
55+ 39%
Children in Home
Yes 70%
No 38%
Education
High school 37%
Univ/college 46%
Grad school 49%
Income
<$35K 25%
$35K - <$75K 44%
$75K+ 50%
Region
North 40%
East 44%
Southwest 42%
Metro T.O. 39%
GTA Urban 53%
GTA Ex-urban 47%

Market Probe 96
Total Usage of the Public Library
Q.2/3/4a/b
• The breakout of library usage at a household level was quite consistent across the two populations surveyed.
• The only significant difference is fewer web panelists reported that other household members used the library in the past
year when they themselves did not. This was at least in part due to the fact that web panelists came from smaller
households with fewer children compared with those interviewed by phone.
No One
24%
Other
Household
Member(s)
Only
3%
With Others in
Household
45%
Respondent
Only
28%
Total Users
= 73%

Market Probe 97
68%
34%
31%
24%
22%
20%
15%
14%
12%
10%
9%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%Q.6a/b
Base: Those who personally visited the public library (757); households where anyone used the public library (808).
• At both an individual and household level, web panelists gave fewer reasons for using the public library than telephone
respondents. The ordering of the reasons turned out to be similar except that online respondents placed use of the
library’s wireless network higher on the list and relaxing/socializing lower.
other materials
Read or study
personal interest
Use the library's wireless network
Access the Internet using library
computers
Relax or socialize
activity
Work assignment or keep up-to-
date at work
75%
41%
33%
28%
28%
23%
19%
19%
14%
16%
20%
Total Household

Market Probe 98
90%
46%
43%
32%
31%
30%
22%
21%
18%
11%
11%
58%
24%
31%
20%
15%
19%
8%
12%
12%
9%
10%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
other materials
personal interest
Read or study
network
Access the Internet using
library computers
Relax or socialize
activity
Work assignment or keep
up-to-date at work
More than 10 past year in-person visits
1 to 10 past year in-person visits
by Frequency of Library Use
Q.6a
Base: Frequent library users (225); infrequent users (532).
• Based on responses to the online survey, frequent in-person visitors to the library made more use of all library services
than those who didn’t visit as frequently, and in most cases, the differences were significant.

Market Probe 100
43%
28%
18%
16%
12%
6%
5%
5%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Not interested
Get information
from other sources
Prefer to buy /
share books
Too busy
Don't read
Library services /
materials aren't
suitable /
satisfactory
Library isn't
accessible
Have own
library / books
Total Reasons for Not Using the Public Library
in the Past Year
Q.9a/b
Base: Past-year public library non-users (298).
Note: Mentions of 3% or more only. May total more than 100%, due to multiple mentions.
• For web respondents, the most frequently cited reason for not using the public library was that they were simply not
interested, whereas phone survey participants were more apt to say they get information from other sources.
• Lack of interest is high among those with lower incomes and those who don’t read books.
None 54%
1-5 39%
6-15 36%
16+ 36%
Library Benefits
Top 29%
Middle 42%
Bottom 54%
Income
<$35K 60%
$35K - <$75K 37%
$75K+ 45%
Community Size
<30K 23%
30K - <500K 48%
500K+ 45%
Region
North 21%
East 39%
Southwest 56%
Metro T.O. 39%
GTA Urban 56%
GTA Ex-urban 16%

Market Probe 101
Experience Using the Library
• Similar percentages of library non-users from the telephone and web surveys said they had ever used the public library,
but the proportion of all past and current users who had a negative experience was twice as high for the online group.
• For web survey takers, the most common complaint had to do with unfriendly or unhelpful library staff.
Type of Negative Experience
Staff aren’t friendly / helpful 21%
Materials / books not available 14%
It’s noisy / people are disruptive 14%
Terrible return system / books returned but
still fined late fees 13%
Difficulties with computers / forgot pin # 6%
Materials / books are damaged / ripped 6%
Poor security 4%
Difficulty getting card 3%
I owe penalty fees 2%
It’s overcrowded 2%
Fine / fees are too high 2%
Rooms aren't available 2%
Other 12%
89%11%
Yes (%)
No (%)
Ever used the public library
Had a negative experience
10%90%
Yes (%)
No (%)
Children in Home
Yes 97%
No 88%
Income
<$35K 73%
$35K - <$75K 88%
$75K+ 96%
Born in Canada
Yes 92%
No 78%
None 85%
1-5 95%
6-15 89%
16+ 89%
None 80%
1-10 times 95%
11+ times 89%
Library Benefits
Top 88%
Middle 93%
Bottom 82%
Q.9d/e/f
Base: Past-year non-users of library (298); All users of library (1070); Had a negative library experience (112).

Market Probe 102
• As might be expected, web panel members are more likely than phone respondents to have Internet access at home or
at work.
• They are no more likely, however, to access the Internet at other places around the community, including the library.
• As was the case with the phone survey, those under the age of 25 form one of the library’s biggest Internet user groups.
99%
96%
59%
43%
40%
24%
15%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
At home
At work
community using wireless
access
community using a
smartphone
At your public library
At school
Ways Internet Was Accessed in the Past Year
Q.10
Any access Cardholder
Yes 32%
No 6%
None 2%
1-10 times 28%
11+ times 48%
None 6%
1-5 25%
6-15 27%
16+ 29%
Yes 43%
No 20%
Yes 36%
No 8%
Library
Yes 46%
No 22%
Library Benefits
Top 34%
Middle 22%
Bottom 7%
Age
18-24 39%
25-34 29%
35-54 25%
55+ 16%
Children in Home
Yes 34%
No 21%
Education
High school 18%
Univ/college 24%
Grad school 28%
Region
North 18%
East 21%
Southwest 19%
Metro T.O. 25%
GTA Urban 28%
GTA Ex-urban 30%

Market Probe 103
99%
86%
84%
73%
56%
33%
24%
23%
6%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Search for specific
information of interest
Use e-mail, a chat room or IM
To access the news
To access social networking
sites
To stream movies, music or
To download movies, music or
To download books or
magazines
To create content
Use of Internet
Q.10/11
Regular Use of
Internet
Age
18-24 70%
25-34 69%
35-54 58%
55+ 43%
Age
18-24 15%
25-34 6%
35-54 5%
55+ 5%
• Not surprisingly, pretty well all web respondents are regular users of the Internet.
• Compared with telephone respondents who regularly use the Internet, web responders are more likely to access the
news and use e-mail/chat/IM, but are less likely to stream or download items or create content.

Market Probe 104
Books Read in the Past Year
Q.13f
• Web panelists tended to read fewer books in the past year than those who responded to the survey by phone, but the
proportion of non-readers was consistent across the two populations.
• Women and those over the age of 55 are among the heaviest readers of books.
86%
27%
28%
31%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
16+ books read
6 to 15 books read
1 to 5 books read
Any Books Read
Cardholder
Yes 31%
No 17%
None 15%
1-10 times 22%
11+ times 56%
None 13%
1-10 times 25%
11+ times 58%
None 18%
1-10 times 25%
11+ times 53%
Yes 36%
No 24%
Work 25%
Home 27%
School 22%
Library 32%
Other 26%
Yes 36%
No 15%
Library Benefits -u
Top 38%
Middle 23%
Bottom 11%
Gender
Male 20%
Female 33%
Age
18-24 18%
25-34 18%
35-54 22%
55+ 38%
Education
High school 24%
Univ/college 24%
Grad school 38%
Born in Canada
Yes 28%
No 22%
Language
English 27%
French 32%
Other 7%
Region
North 28%
East 31%
Southwest 31%
Metro T.O. 27%
GTA Urban 20%
GTA Ex-urban 30%

Market Probe 105
Format of Books Read in the Past Year
Q.13g
Base: Read any books in the past year (946).
• Those who completed the online survey were somewhat more inclined to read books in electronic format than those
who completed the phone survey.
• E-book usage was more common in Metro Toronto and urban portions of the GTA.
17%
66%
18%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Mostly in electronic
format
Mostly in hard copy
Both equally
None 24%
1-10 times 15%
11+ times 13%
None 24%
1-10 times 16%
11+ times 11%
None 11%
1-10 times 18%
11+ times 21%
Language
English 17%
French 8%
Other 22%
Region
North 12%
East 12%
Southwest 16%
Metro T.O. 21%
GTA Urban 19%
GTA Ex-urban 12%

Market Probe 106
12%
18%
51%
19%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
More than 10 times
6 to 10 times
1 to 5 times
None
• In the web survey, in-person bookstore use was a separate question from online use of book vendors, making
comparisons to the telephone survey results invalid.
• Web panelists between the ages of 25 and 34 and those whose preferred language is not English or French appear to
visit bricks and mortar bookstores less often than other segments of the population.
Past Year Bookstore In-Person Visit Frequency
Q.14c
None 9%
1-10 times 11%
11+ times 16%
None 1%
1-5 5%
6-15 11%
16+ 25%
None 5%
1-10 times 9%
11+ times 36%
Library
Yes 21%
No 11%
Age
18-24 13%
25-34 7%
35-54 12%
55+ 13%
Language
English 12%
French 12%
Other 4%
Region
North 18%
East 15%
Southwest 10%
Metro T.O. 13%
GTA Urban 7%
GTA Ex-urban 16%

Market Probe 107
14%
14%
41%
31%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
More than 10 times
6 to 10 times
1 to 5 times
None
• The percentage of web panelists visiting book vendors online more than 10 times in the last year is similar to the
percentage visiting physical bookstores the same number of times, but at the other end of the scale, there are more
people not visiting online book vendors at all.
• Those with higher education and incomes were more apt to be frequent online book vendor users.
Past Year Online Book Vendor Visit Frequency
Q.14d
None 5%
1-5 6%
6-15 15%
16+ 28%
None 9%
1-10 times 10%
11+ times 44%
Education
High school 8%
Univ/college 13%
Grad school 22%
Income
<$35K 14%
$35K - <$75K 12%
$75K+ 18%
Born in Canada
Yes 15%
No 10%
Language
English 14%
French 24%
Other 6%
Region
North 16%
East 19%
Southwest 12%
Metro T.O. 15%
GTA Urban 12%
GTA Ex-urban 10%

Market Probe 108
22%
47%
31%
Online vendor more
About the same
Bookstores more
Frequency of Visiting Online Book Vendor vs. Bookstore
Q.14c/d
• Comparing individuals’ answers to the previous two questions, nearly one-quarter of those surveyed indicated that they
used online book vendors more frequently than actually going to a bookstore, while almost one-third indicated the
opposite.
• Those who use online book vendors more include French-speaking Ontarians.
None 13%
1-5 18%
6-15 26%
16+ 28%
None 38%
1-10 times 19%
11+ times 12%
Yes 25%
No 19%
Education
High school 13%
Univ/college 21%
Grad school 33%
Income
<$35K 21%
$35K - <$75K 18%
$75K+ 28%
Language
English 21%
French 37%
Other 20%
Region
North 22%
East 27%
Southwest 23%
Metro T.O. 24%
GTA Urban 20%
GTA Ex-urban 9%

Market Probe 109
Library vs. Bookstore Usage, In-Person and Online
9%
21%
26%
12%
21%
10%
13%
15%
19%
10%
25%
18%
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
Library
only
Library
more
Both
equally
Bookstore
more
Bookstore
only
Neither
In-Person Usage Online Usage
• Comparisons of individuals’ reported frequency of using the library and bookstores in-person and online were made and
are presented in the chart below.
• With regard to in-person usage, the largest group of respondents reported using the library and bookstores about
equally, while for online usage, use of bookstores exclusively predominated.
• Interestingly, more people access both bookstores only and libraries only online as opposed to in-person (but in both
cases, exclusive use of one over the other is much greater for bookstores than libraries).
Q.2/3/14c/d

Market Probe 110
33%67%
Yes
No
88%
35%
22%
11%
4%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
A desktop or laptop
computer
A tablet
A smartphone
An e-reader
An iPod or MP3
player
Accessing Library Resources Electronically
Q.8c/d/e
Base: Those who checked the library’s online catalogue, downloaded an item, or accessed other electronic materials
on the library’s web page (449); Respondents who did not use an e-reader to access resources from the library
(1054); Those who own an e-reader but did not use it to access resources from the library (349).
Devices Used to Access
Resources from the Library
• Desktop or laptop computers remain the most common devices for accessing the public library electronically, with
smartphones and tablets also having been used by approximately one-quarter to one-third of online users, respectively.
• One-third of those who have not used an e-reader to access library resources actually own such a device, but of that
group, fewer than one-third have ever attempted to use their e-reader to download books from the library.
E-reader ownership
(among those who have
not used an e-reader to
access library resources)
30% 70%
Yes
No
Ever tried to download
public library e-books
using an e-reader

Market Probe 111
27%
22%
15%
13%
13%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Zinio
Hoopla
AskON
Indieflix
Freegal
Familiarity and Use of New Electronic Channels
Q.8f
Base: Those who checked the library’s online catalogue, downloaded an item, or accessed other electronic materials
on the library’s web page (449).
Familiar with Channel
• Relatively few of those who use the library to access electronic materials said they were familiar with the different
electronic channels or services some libraries offer.
• Zinio and Hoopla were most familiar to online library users, with the latter being accessed more through the library than
elsewhere.
Accessed via Library Account
7%
9%
3%
1%
4%
Accessed Elsewhere
9%
2%
3%
2%
2%

Market Probe
ATTITUDES TOWARD THE PUBLIC LIBRARY
Market Probe

Market Probe 113
• Web panelists were not quite as concerned as telephone survey respondents about the impact a potential library closing
would have on their community; still almost two-thirds thought that the impact would be major.
• Those predicting the biggest impact were located in certain areas, namely Northern Ontario, Southwest Ontario and
non-urban parts of the GTA.
Impact of Public Library Closing on Community
Q.16a-b
64%
29%
7%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Major Impact
Minor Impact
No Impact at all
Cardholder
Yes 71%
No 50%
None 46%
1-10 times 67%
11+ times 86%
None 36%
1-5 57%
6-15 74%
16+ 76%
None 51%
1-10 times 66%
11+ times 76%
Work 64%
Home 65%
School 59%
Library 77%
Other 68%
Yes 73%
No 53%
Yes 74%
No 62%
Library Benefits
Top 85%
Middle 59%
Bottom 29%
Gender
Male 60%
Female 68%
Age
18-24 51%
25-34 62%
35-54 62%
55+ 72%
Children in Home
Yes 70%
No 62%
Education
High school 63%
Univ/college 62%
Grad school 73%
Community Size
<30K 75%
30K - <500K 70%
500K+ 60%
Region
North 76%
East 58%
Southwest 72%
Metro T.O. 63%
GTA Urban 60%
GTA Ex-urban 75%

Market Probe 114
• Online survey participants were more apt to think closing of their local library would have a minor rather than a major
impact on their family, whereas the opposite was true for those surveyed by phone.
Impact of Public Library Closing on Family
Q.16a-a
32%
45%
23%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Major Impact
Minor Impact
No Impact at all
Cardholder
Yes 45%
No 5%
None 3%
1-10 times 32%
11+ times 79%
None 4%
1-5 21%
6-15 39%
16+ 53%
None 21%
1-10 times 34%
11+ times 42%
Yes 62%
No 25%
Work 30%
Home 32%
School 29%
Library 53%
Other 31%
Yes 51%
No 8%
Library
Yes 55%
No 30%
Library Benefits
Top 63%
Middle 20%
Bottom 2%
Gender
Male 29%
Female 35%
Age
18-24 21%
25-34 25%
35-54 35%
55+ 36%
Children in Home
Yes 41%
No 30%
Education
High school 29%
Univ/college 31%
Grad school 41%
Income
<$35K 23%
$35K - <$75K 33%
$75K+ 30%
Language
English 32%
French 44%
Other 28%
<5 km 36%
6-10 km 30%
11+ km 20%

Market Probe 115
33%
56%
11%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Top of list
Middle of list
Bottom of list
Benefit of Public Libraries Relative to
Other Municipal Tax-Supported Services
Q.16
• Where respondents placed the benefits the library delivers relative to other tax-supported services was very similar for
the two populations surveyed.
• Consistent with the findings from the telephone survey, people under the age of 35 were less likely to appreciate the
benefits of the public library compared to other municipal services.
Cardholder
Yes 40%
No 15%
None 15%
1-10 times 31%
11+ times 64%
None 19%
1-5 23%
6 -15 36%
16+ 47%
None 29%
1-10 times 32%
11+ times 40%
Yes 47%
No 29%
Work 30%
Home 33%
School 23%
Library 46%
Other 32%
Yes 43%
No 19%
Age
18-24 22%
25-34 26%
35-54 34%
55+ 38%
Education
High school 35%
Univ/college 30%
Grad school 43%

Market Probe 116
53
41
40
40
39
37
35
30
28
26
23
22
21
• Except for a couple of items near the bottom of the list, web panelists did not value the different services the library
provides as highly as phone survey respondents did.
• The biggest difference of opinion between the two groups was with respect to early literacy programs.
Perceived Value of Library Services
Q.17
21
27
26
27
30
33
29
40
38
45
43
45
47
Bottom 6 Ratings
Top 2 Ratings
Lender of materials
projects or homework
Reference centre
Place to study
based kiosks
Trainer in how to access
info online
entrepreneurs

Market Probe 117
Value of Services by How Library Ranks
Compared to Other Municipal Tax-Supported Services
MeanScore
Q.16/17
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
7.0
8.0
9.0
10.0
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
LenderofM
aterialsReference
Centre
Assistance
in
Finding
Info
Place
to
Study
Early
Literacy
Progam
s
LocalHistory
Collections
Inform
ation
forUnem
ployed
Services
to
New
Canadians
Training
in
H
ow
to
Access
Info
G
overnm
entServices
Kiosks
M
eeting
Place
Resources
forSm
allBusiness
Library at Top of List Library in Middle of List Library at Bottom of List
• This chart (which shows the average value scores of the different library offerings according to where the library was
placed relative to other tax-supported services) resembles the chart generated for those interviewed by phone, except
all lines on this chart appear lower on the scale, and the line in the middle is not quite as close to the top line as it was
for the phone survey.

Market Probe 118
• As was the case with value perceptions, web panelists claimed that they and others in their households have made less
use of most of the services compared to those surveyed by phone.
• The biggest gap in usage for the two populations was recorded for getting assistance in finding information.
55%
23%
20%
20%
16%
15%
10%
6%
6%
5%
5%
4%
3%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Past Year Usage of Library Services
by Someone in Household
Q.18
Lender of materials
Reference centre
Place to study
Help with school projects or
homework
Training in how to access information
online
based kiosks
entrepreneurs

Market Probe 119
Value & Usage Combined
Q.17/18
0
40
80
Government services through
library-based kiosks
Reference centre
entrepreneurs
Training in how to access info online
Percent Valuing the Service Percent Using the Service
• The chart below, which plots percent of web respondents giving each service a 9 or 10 on the 10-point value scale along
with the percent of households using the service in the past year, is very similar to the corresponding chart for the phone
survey.
• The biggest difference between this pattern and the corresponding one for those surveyed by phone is that, for phone
respondents, there was no gap between value and usage when it came to assistance in finding information.
0
40
80
Assistance in Finding Information
Early Literacy Programs
Focal Point or Meeting Place
Government Services Kiosks
Information for the Unemployed
Lender of Materials
Local History CollectionsPlace to Study
Reference Centre
Resources for Small Business
Services to New Canadians
Support for School Projects or
Homework
Training in How to Access Info Online

Market Probe 120
Lender of
Materials
Reference
Centre
Government Services
Kiosks
Meeting Place
Early Literacy
Programs
Place to
Study
Local History
Collections
Training in How
to Access Info
Information for
Unemployed
Resources for
Small Business
Assistance in
Finding Info
Services to
New Canadians
Support of School
Projects/Homework
6.2
6.4
6.6
6.8
7.0
7.2
7.4
7.3 7.5 7.7 7.9 8.1 8.3 8.5 8.7 8.9
Relative Value of Services to Users and Non-Users
Q.17
ValuetoNon-UsersofEachService
Value to Users of Each Service
• The chart below depicts relative value of each service, according to whether or not a household member used that
service in the last year. The centre point of the x and y axes have been designed to represent the mid-point of user and
non-user ratings, respectively, and the dotted line indicates points at which the relative value to users and non-users
would be the same.
• Lying furthest from the equal relative value line, services to new Canadians and support for school projects / homework
are of higher relative value to non-users of these services than users of them, while the opposite is true for resources for
small business and use of the library as a meeting place.

Market Probe 121
A program that allows people to try out the newest tech devices or
applications, such as 3D printers or laser cutters
Library kiosks located throughout the community where people
can check out books, movies or music without having to go to the
library itself
A personalized online account that gives you recommendations
based on your past library activity
A cell phone app that allows you to access library services from
your mobile phone
An online research service where you could pose questions and
get responses from librarians
A cell phone app that helps you locate material easily in the library
using GPS
E-book readers already loaded with the book you want to read
Instruction on how to use handheld reading devices and tablets
Classes on how to download library e-books to handheld devices
A digital media lab where you could create and upload new digital
content like your own movies or e-books
The Likelihood of Using Library Services
• Online survey participants were asked their likelihood of using some new services libraries are either offering or thinking
of offering in the future. Interest in these concepts varied, in many cases based on age.
• There were very few suggestions made for other services over and above those shown.
Other Services Library Should Provide
More selection of materials /
updated materials
2%
Computer / Internet skills /
technical devices
2%
For kids / students 2%
Educational courses / lectures /
seminars / community events
2%
Hobbies / special interests 2%
Quiet space / reading / sitting
areas
1%
More online services, i.e. card
renewals / book / material
reserving
1%
They do a good job 7%
Other 16%
No comments / suggestions 65%
19%
15%
15%
16%
10%
12%
12%
9%
9%
7%
36%
35%
35%
29%
33%
27%
26%
26%
24%
24%
55%
50%
49%
44%
44%
39%
38%
35%
33%
31%
Very Likely Somewhat Likely Total
64% 46%
57% 39%
61% 39%
62% 24%
43% 37%
54% 19%
45% 34%
31% 40%
30% 38%
42% 21%
By Age
18-34 55+
Q.13c/d

Market Probe 122
Best Way to Inform about What’s Going On at the Library
Q.13e
66%
51%
45%
35%
34%
30%
26%
19%
8%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Email
Articles in the local paper
Information on the library's website
Social media
Notices at the library
Notices in community centres or
other public places
Inserts with your tax bill or other
local government mailings
Notices in schools
Talks/presentations to community
groups
• Panel members were asked to identify the best ways to inform them about what’s going on at their local public library.
• Email, articles in the local paper, and information posted on the library’s website received the greatest numbers of
mentions, in general, with younger people also favouring social media.
59% 73%
40% 63%
36% 48%
46% 22%
31% 34%
28% 32%
20% 32%
21% 12%
6% 12%
By Age
18-34 55+

Market Probe 123
Believability of Positioning Statements
Q.19
• Four of the positioning statements tested with online respondents garnered stronger agreement than the rest.
• There was least support for libraries providing information that would help people better understand political issues.
56%
54%
50%
46%
34%
32%
31%
30%
29%
28%
26%
26%
25%
19%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Public libraries are important because they promote literacy and a love
of reading
By providing free access to materials and resources, the public library
plays an important role in giving everyone a chance to succeed
Having a public library improves the quality of life in a community
Public libraries are welcoming, friendly places
The public library is the only affordable place where the average
Ontarian can go for information
Public libraries provide many services people would have a hard time
finding elsewhere
The public library provides valuable resources to increase health
literacy within the communities it serves
The public library is the best place for people of all ages to go to
pursue lifelong learning
Public libraries have done a good job of keeping up with new
technologies
The public library serves as an important meeting place and focal point
within the community
The public library is continually expanding the services it offers
It is very easy to find whatever you are looking for at the public library
Now that information is available from so many different sources,
people need public libraries more than ever
By providing access to information from a wide variety of sources,
public libraries promote an understanding of political issues
% Strongly Agree

Market Probe
DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE OF RESPONDENTS
Market Probe

Market Probe 125
Q.A/B
Respondent Age / Gender
Respondent Age Gender
12%
16%
38%
35%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
18 to 24
25 to 34
35 to 54
55+ Average Age
46
48%
52%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Male
Female
• Since quotas were placed on age and gender, these numbers exactly match those from the telephone survey.

Market Probe 126
22%
8%
8%
6%
8%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
5 or younger
6 to 10
11 to 14
15 to 17
Number in Household / Presence of Children in Household
Q.20/21a/b
Any Children
Number in Household Presence of Children in Household
18%
40%
41%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
One
Two
Three or
more
Average Number
2.6
• Compared to the phone survey, there were significantly fewer households with three or more people and households
with any children (especially under the age of 15).

Fopl market probe poll final report 2015 05-08 - v1 - dl

Fopl market probe poll final report 2015 05-08 - v1 - dl

Empfohlen

Weitere ähnliche Inhalte

Was ist angesagt?

Was ist angesagt? (20)

Andere mochten auch

Andere mochten auch (17)

Ähnlich wie Fopl market probe poll final report 2015 05-08 - v1 - dl

Ähnlich wie Fopl market probe poll final report 2015 05-08 - v1 - dl (20)

Mehr von Stephen Abram

Mehr von Stephen Abram (20)

Kürzlich hochgeladen

Kürzlich hochgeladen (20)

Fopl market probe poll final report 2015 05-08 - v1 - dl