Two and a Half Cheers for the "Customer Mindset"

One of the perennial complaints we hear in higher education is about what seems like a growing tendency among university administrators to think of students (and then to insist that we think of students) as "customers" – people who are entitled to basically whatever they want, and to whose every whim and preference we should cater.

Of course, what makes this issue complicated is that in some important ways, students really are customers: they're paying tuition (in some cases a very large amount of tuition) and they're often paying the university for housing and food as well, and there are certain things they should be able to expect in return.

For example: in return for their tuition payments, students should be able to expect that they'll be taught competently the curricula for which they sign up. If a class is advertised as being about 19th-century English literature, that's what should be taught in the class. And the class should be taught by an instructor who is well prepared, who shows up (and shows up on time), who can speak clearly in the university's language of instruction, who grades consistently and fairly, etc. In the provision of these things, it makes sense that we think of students as "customers."

However, the fact that students are paying tuition clearly does not entitle them to particular grades, or to coursework that is undemanding, or to a style of teaching that they find entirely congenial and in harmony with their personal preferences. If a university pushes faculty to treat students as "customers" in these senses, that would be inappropriate.

The academic library faces similar complexities. In some ways, it seems obvious that students (and other patrons) can appropriately be thought of as "customers" of the library's products and services and should be treated as such: we should be thinking about which services and information resources they need in order to do their academic work, and we should cater intentionally to those needs. They should expect that they will be treated with respect and kindness by everyone who works in the library. They should be able to expect that the library's service points, collections, and facilities are organized and provided with their needs in mind, rather than for the convenience of library employees. It makes sense for us to bear in mind that students are paying to use the library, whereas we are being paid to work in the library.

On the other hand, the fact that students are paying tuition and fees, and the fact that we are being paid to serve them, does not mean that students are entitled to everything that might be offered to them by a commercial establishment that relies on their ongoing business for its sustainability. The fact that we have an equal obligation to serve all students puts a natural limit on the amount of time we can spend with any individual student and on the degree to which we can customize our services to meet the needs of any subset of the student body; the fact that our facilities are used by an entire campus means that we can't always give an individual student (or faculty member) the kind of access that he or she always wants. And the fact that we support an educational enterprise puts some limits on the ways in which we help students – a student may, for example, want a librarian to do work for him that the librarian feels is inappropriate, and appeals to the virtue of "customer service" will likely fall on deaf ears in such a case, as they should.

So how do we decide when and how we'll regard students as "customers" and when we won't? I suggest the following principles:

• Every student has the same status. Every student patron is (and is not) a customer in exactly the same way as all others. We may provide different services or different levels of service depending on need, but all students with a particular need are treated the same way, regardless of who they are.
• The library must know (and be able to explain coherently) what is included and what's extra. In other words, the library needs to have a coherent set of policies that govern what students can expect to be provided and what is an "extra." Do they get a certain number of free pages of printing per year, or does the library impose a fee for every copy or page? Are rooms reservable without charge? All of these policies must be clearly documented and administered consistently, and the policies must be easily accessible by patrons.
• The library's collections, spaces, and services should be organized with the needs of patrons foremost in mind. This may sound obvious, but it's not as obvious as it should be. We don't select information resources based on which publishers we like and which ones we don't, but rather based on the curricular and research needs of our patrons. We don't organize library spaces in order to preserve our preferred workflows, but in order to make the library as useful as possible to patrons. We set service hours in accordance with the needs of our patrons, not necessarily to meet the convenience of employees, etc.
• Every patron must be treated with respect and kindness. This should go without saying, but sadly, it can't: whether you like the idea of a "customer mindset" or not, there is no excuse for treating library patrons – especially students – with condescension, impatience, or rudeness. Now, to be clear: this does not mean that we give every student whatever they want, and it does not mean that we beat around the bush when policies needs to be explained or enforced. Nor does it mean that we cater to every student's desires or demands. It does mean that we offer every student the full benefit of our professional skill and preparation, and do so with patience and kindness.