Influence of Professional Library Privacy Ethics on the Management of Digitally Transformed Public Library Patron Data: An Exploratory Study Among Australian Public Library Staff

Public libraries in Australia are free and open to the whole community, including vulnerable and marginalised groups, and hold positions as trusted institutions. They handle sensitive, personal information queries and disclosures from patrons, including on topics such as health, welfare and immigration status. A range of Public Library Patron Data (PLPD) is generated in the course of libraries providing services, and access to third-party resources and systems. Libraries have long-established attitudes, values and professional ethics, supporting and defending the privacy of patron data. Public libraries are perceived as safe spaces, with no agenda for monetising data. The focus of this study is to explore how professional library privacy ethics influence the management of PLPD in practice. The overriding research problem addressed in the current research is the potential conflict between collection, storage, access, management and use of digitally transformed public library patron data, and professional library ethics around personal data privacy. The guiding research question is: In the context of digital transformation, how are decisions and practices around public library patron data in Australia influenced by stated professional library ethics and principles of privacy? PLPD exists in a complex, digitally transformed environment, and is not contained within a magic bubble of privacy, within the walls of the library. The nature, volume, velocity and handling of PLPD are changing and are marked by various factors, including the types of data collected, data aggregation, data analytics, and interconnectedness with third-parties. The literature review revealed numerous studies containing assumptions of the importance to the library profession of privacy ethics, but showed that elements of the technical eco-system pose potential risks to library patron privacy, and that there are risks of harm and exploitation resulting from misuse of patron data. Conversely, some studies highlighted the potential for marketing library services by greater use of patron data. Previous research has focused largely on individual library technologies. These studies have not addressed how library ethics actually influence management of this data, or other processes of influence at play in the overall, interconnected sphere of systems, resources and policies. Prior studies have not focused on exploring the perspectives, experiences and feelings of library staff. The significance of this study has relevance for a large cohort of society – public library patrons – which includes a range of vulnerable and marginalised population groups, in a site of increasingly mandated digital engagement with essential government services. There are risks of harm and exploitation resulting from misuse of patron data. Understanding how library ethics influence management of this data, to avoid such risks, is the motivation for this research. A shared understanding of the management of public library patron data helps to avoid ambiguities and unintended consequences, and allows best practice across public library services. The research informs library policy and practice, and education of library skill sets and ethics. It has practical relevance to both the technical skills of librarianship and the emerging areas of critical librarianship and library ethics in practice. A theoretical framework, drawn from a range of disciplines, was developed as a place to store data and relationships between data, and a lens for processing new knowledge. The framework accommodated the need for a holistic view of multiple, interconnected constructs of the phenomenon, and interrelated influences and motivations. It guided the design and operationalisation of data collection and synthesis, framing technical, institutional, normative and personal constructs of the phenomenon. The framework included five processes of influence: • Decision making motivated by ethical dimension • Decision making motivated by structural dimension • Coercive isomorphism • Mimetic isomorphism • Normative isomorphism Using an interpretive paradigm, and a qualitative approach, this 2-phase research explored the influence of professional library privacy ethics on the management of digitally transformed PLPD and the relationship between these in practice. Data from existing policy documents and system, service and resource information, at a large multi-branch Australian public library were collected. Components of the digital eco-system, relevant to PLPD in a public library setting, were identified, analyzed with Descriptive Coding and arranged as an inventory and glossary of terms. The context set by Phase 1 data provided structure and context for Phase 2 data gathering, allowing the researcher to draw participants into contemplation of that bigger picture, and consider their practice as part of it. In Phase 2, 10 semi-structured interviews were undertaken with public library staff, with 4 participants from the Initial Case and 6 participants from other Australian public libraries. The interviews explored how library staff understand, think about and practice within the digital eco-system. Both In Vivo Coding (alternatively known as Inductive Coding) and Process Coding were used for thematic analysis of Phase 2 data. The findings indicated that library practice is contextual and that context is bounded by the lack of a holistic view of the phenomenon; inconsistent knowledge, experience and awareness of factors external to the participant’s role; and insufficient time and opportunity for library staff to discuss and reflect on ethical privacy issues. In answer to the research question, it was concluded that factors of influence may be silent, unknown or unacknowledged. While professional ethics are a powerful motivation for participants, they did not demonstrate deep knowledge of the connections between their decisions and practice, and what is happening in the wider sphere. Decisions and practice motivated by ethics can be moderated, and may be subverted, by other influencing factors. Coercive isomorphism, in particular, is often invisible and not well understood by library staff. The study found a lack of clarity as to whether privacy ethics are the domain of individual staff or the organisation as a whole. The findings also revealed vague and conflicting understandings of where boundaries of privacy responsibility exist across libraries, vendors and patrons. Limited opportunities for shared consideration of privacy ethics, among library staff, lessens their ability to engage with these issues. The study identified practical recommendations for library practice and policy, as well as for future research, which will make a practical contribution to library practice and policy. Recommendations include: - Allocating time and space for the discussion of ethical privacy issues among library staff; - Opportunities for ethics education and professional development; - Clarity of policies and guidance around problematic scenarios, including young library patrons; - Holistic view of the digital eco-system within which public libraries exist; - Development of structured guidance on the vetting of vendor licences; - Development of a knowledge base of vendor company ownership; - Clarity of the relationship and privacy responsibility between libraries, vendors and patrons. This research contributes to theory by exploring the mechanisms of influence on the management of library patron data and privacy, within a novel framework which allows a holistic view of the data. This research contributes to knowledge by focusing on the public library setting, extending beyond research on data handling by commercial and government entities. It also builds on research about professional library ethics and patron data privacy, which has often focused on academic library settings. The study can stimulate new discussions about data privacy in the realm of public libraries – a domain sometimes overlooked due to its perceived status of safe community space. The findings will be of interest to public library patrons, library staff, managers and educators, and to local councils. The findings aid an open and transparent professional discourse, which will contribute to greater clarity and certainty for library practitioners who experience ethical dilemmas in their work. An understanding of library staff experience provides public library managers with knowledge of how libraries are fulfilling their privacy values. They are also of use to local government authorities whose privacy responsibilities encompass the handling of personal data in public libraries.