Abstract 28Research into the appropriation of social media by academic libraries in countries with growing economies is scarce. There remains an empirical and theoretical gap on how librarians, particularly those in Southern Africa, are deploying 23social media in their work routines, and in their personal lives. Using data derived from a questionnaire survey among librarians 25at the University of the Western Cape (UWC),13South Africa and the National University of Science and Technology (NUST), Zimbabwe, this study examines how they use social media for professional and personal purposes. The findings suggest that UWC librarians are more proficient social media users than NUST librarians. It further reveals that UWC librarians themselves are managing social media while at NUST the Information Technology (IT) Department is directly responsible for the platforms. Commensurately, while UWC Library widely utilises social media for promote their services, NUST Library uses social media for reference services. Keywords Social media, Technological Acceptance Model (TAM), academic libraries, 9National University of Science and Technology (NUST), University of the Western Cape (UWC) 1 Introduction University libraries in Africa are under pressure to provide their patrons with quality services. This is important because today’s library users live in a highly interactive and networked world for their information needs (Kibugi 2013). As social media increasingly become a strategic resource for university education, its adoption and use is no longer a luxury amongst academic libraries. By definition social media platforms are powerful technological tools for communication loosely summed up as technologies used for interacting, creating and sharing information all “built on the ideological and technological foundations of Web 2.0” (Kaplan & Haenlein 2010: 61). Social media applications have become critical for librarians to actively take part in the international information arena at the same time offer quick and up-to-date services. In line with this view, Gauntner Witte (2014) maintains that “there is a notable shift from using social media as the voice of the institution to being the voice of a librarian within the institution”. To successfully embrace these requirements, librarians must be competent in social media application as this is requisite for the 21st century librarian (Vanwynsberghe et al.2015). Academic libraries are particularly strategic in comparison to other libraries in that they offer research and knowledge exchange activities that underpin the very existence of their parent institutions. As such, academic libraries are crucial to the operation of tertiary institutions and their academic quests (Moran & Leonard 2009: 2). Tripathi and Kumar (2010: 195) state that previously academic libraries were “place-based” services within universities and patrons physically went to the library to consult librarians and/or to use the physical collections. Due to 31the overwhelming success of Internet services, academic libraries have incorporated new technologies such as social media to offer virtual services. Academic libraries are including social media platforms as they lend themselves to enabling closer ties between libraries and users irrespective of geographical distance (Oosman, McMillan & Bell 2014). The government of South Africa offers research funds hence the need for a robust Internet connectivity within universities in order to fully support educational demands. The 5Tertiary Education and Research Network of South Africa (TENET) operates a South African National Research Network (SANReN) which ensures affordable, first preference and efficient Internet access amongst public universities in South Africa. The University of the Western Cape, amongst other institutions, is enjoying these Internet privileges. This directly supports the UWC Library in fulfilling its mission to support teaching, learning, and research by making available relevant resources, employing suitable staff, and offering an environment favourable for patrons’ knowledge acquisition. The library has appropriated mobile technologies such as iPads which are used for teaching and learning in an ‘iPad laboratory’ situated inside the library as well as e-readers which are available for patrons to borrow on short- loan basis. In Zimbabwe, approximately thirty-one percent of the national budget is allocated to higher education although currently, universities rely heavily on student fees. Chitanana (2012) maintains that Zimbabwean universities have made significant strides towards increasing their bandwidth and improving their networks. As a result of these investments National University of Science and Technology has taken a step towards developing science and technology research through establishing the Zimbabwean Journal of Science and Technology. As such, the NUST Library is under pressure to effectively utilise the latest technologies for service and information provision to the university community. Amongst other resources, the library has a digital library, which is offered through Greenstone (free software found online provided by UNESCO) and a mobile site which ensures library access to remote users who own mobile technologies. The growing popularity and usage of new technology applications amongst tertiary institutions as indicated above, has pointed to the need for a mutual effort 26in the effective adoption and deployment of social media platforms amongst university libraries as a way of ensuring excellent service provision. In this light, this paper addresses how UWC and NUST library staff use social media in their work routines and general everyday life. The paper specifically seeks to answer the following questions: How familiar are the library staff with social media and which tools do they use mostly? Where do they access social media? For what purposes do library staff use social media tools? And what factors shape and constrain library staff’s use of social media tools? 2 Research methodology and theoretical framework To help answer these questions this research is underpinned by the Technological 33Acceptance Model (TAM) propounded by Fred Davis in 1989. It consists of two variables the 6Perceived usefulness and Perceived ease of use of the relevant technology. Perceived usefulness is defined here as the“degree to which a person believes that using a particular system would enhance his or her job performance”. Perceived ease of use on the other hand refers to the “degree to which a person believes that using a particular technological system would be free of effort”. This model is essential and relevant to this study because it has been used in other studies to investigate intention of use and adoption of technology amongst individuals. Examples of such studies include a study done by Aharony (2013) who fused the TAM and the big five. Also Spacey, Goulding and Murray (2004) used the TAM to find out 22the adoption and use of Internet technology amongst librarians in England. Methodologically, the study uses 38a case study research design, defined as a“method of studying elements of the social through comprehensive description and analysis of a situation, for example a detailed study of a group or event” (O’Leary 2004: 23). The study made a closer interrogation of two cases paying particular attention to how librarians at NUST and UWC libraries respectively use social media technologies. It employed a Web-based questionnaire, which was sent to 59 UWC librarians, and 43 (72.8%) responses were received. Of 40 NUST librarians, 29 responded, representing a response rate of 72.5%. 3 Literature review Since the appropriation of social media in academic libraries, scholars particularly those in the economically developed countries of the North have been researching the adoption and appropriation of the technologies amongst library staff. Some research in the last few years has found that librarians are out of touch with the technological changes in their profession. This has impacted negatively on their level of familiarity with social media. However, other studies have revealed that librarians across different types of libraries are using social media more and more due to enforcement and demand by senior management (Aharony 2009). Common social media tools identified include Facebook and Twitter for librarians in England and tags for librarians in Asia (Gerolimos & Konsta 2011), RSS and bookmarks for librarians in Midwest of America (Kim & Abbas 2010), Twitter, Facebook and YouTube in Canadian librarians (Collins & Quan-Haase 2012). 19The use of social media tools in academic libraries is said to be gaining momentum in some African countries. For example, Ezeani and Igwesi (2012) mentioned 18that social media tools such as Facebook, MySpace, Twitter and YouTube are increasingly being used by librarians and patrons in Nigerian academic libraries. Similarly, Facebook, blogs, YouTube, wikis, gaming and Skype are commonly used by librarians at the University of Pretoria (Pezhorn & Pienaar 2009). From the above, it is noticeable that there is not much variance in the 11types of social media used by library staff across the world. Every academic 11library has its own purposes for social media. Three major purposes for social media adoption in academic libraries are identified from the literature: 3.1 Marketing and promotion of information services: Harinarayana and Raju (2010) argue that social media technologies are increasingly becoming popular as a marketing strategy by academic libraries. Social media tools have assisted university libraries to offer great support and communicate information services to the patrons (Makori 2011: 35). Using these technologies as communication tools implies that instead of clients going to the library to check on the ‘traditional’ notice boards about what the library wants to communicate to them, it is becoming the norm for librarians to tweet or post on their Facebook page thereby instantly reaching out to as many clients as possible. For example, in his study, Rogers (2010) finds that it is becoming a routine for academic libraries in the United Stated of America to use 20Web 2.0 applications such as social networks and blogs to promote and market library services. 3.2 Online interaction: Instant interaction between a librarian and the client is one of the many reasons why academic libraries have stepped up to integrate social media tools in their daily work. Social media tools such as 1YouTube, MySpace, Facebook, Twitter and Flickr are popular for online collaboration, communication and sharing of information among librarians (Makori 2011: 34) and instant messaging (IM) provides the groundwork 1for librarians to interact with their patrons (Munatsi 2010: 255). Simply put, librarians are now able to instantly interact with users by remotely providing assistance such as virtual reference services (Stephens 2006) and to offer current information to students and researchers (Xu, Ouyand & Chu 2009). This means that instead of organizing face-to-face orientation programs, academic libraries are increasingly using RSS feed readers, podcasts and recorded videos to deliver audio and video commentaries and instructions to users remotely. 3.3 Support of open and distance learning (ODL) and Offering Information Literacy programmes: E-learning is becoming more prevalent in tertiary education, with universities increasingly using online learning environments and more students are comfortably accepting it. Academic library staff have a significant role to play in supporting universities offering e-learning courses by deploying social media technologies. Worldwide university libraries are making strong inroads 4into the use of social media tools1in order to meet the information needs and demands of students in open and distance and learning programmes (Makori 2011: 35). Some lessons can 5 be learnt from the 9Botswana Library and the University of South Africa (UNISA) Library. As Nfila (2010) observed, the University of Botswana Library plans to take advantage of the simplicity of producing podcasts to record course lectures, tutorials, course materials and post them on the library blog so that students registered in e- learning programs can download and use them. The University of South Africa library is already using social media to market and expand 1library and information services to their open and distance library users. Aside from using social media for ODL, librarians are increasingly using them for offering Information Literacy (IL) programmes to their patrons (Luo 2009). Using 32social media applications such as blogs, Wikis, social networking, RSS feeds, Flickr, and YouTube in the IL course can be seen as a unique enhancement of the e- learning environment (Penzhorn 2013). Proficiency in 29the use of social media fits within the information skills requirements for the 21st librarian (Fernandez- Villavicencio 2010; Farkas 2012). Social media applications come with many advantages and disadvantages. One of the greatest advantages is that they offer innovative services in libraries (Penzhorn & Pienaar 2009). The platforms offer enhanced interaction between librarians and patrons in the form of quick communication and feedback (Kwanya, Stillwell & Underwood 2012). Social media improves section management in the library through integration of cataloguing resources for cataloguing departments (Xu, Ouyang & Chu 2009). Conversely, several concerns have been raised against the 24use of social media in academic libraries. One of the major constraints on using social media effectively is the issue of expending time (Cohen 2011; Collins & Quan-Haase 2012: 2). Other concerns include inadequate ICT infrastructure (Arif & Mahmood 2012; Hosseini & Hashempour 2012). Various 2factors that affect the use of social media tools by libraries are highlighted in various scholarly papers. 16Perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use seem to be the dominant determinants which are measured by 37the TAM. Spacey, Goulding and Murray (2004) reported that librarians in England are convinced that Internet technologies make their job easier by allowing efficient communication amongst staff and their library users and they consequently use them a great deal. Aharony (2013) 6 fused the TAM and the big five model of personality traits to investigate factors affecting the adoption of Facebook by librarians in Israel. Likewise, social media tools allow librarians in India to collaborate with other librarians within India and other countries through Facebook, Twitter and other online chat facilities and this has propelled the current use of such technologies in libraries (Thanuskodi 2012). However issues to do with frequent use of passwords to access these technologies and the slow response time of the Internet and firewalls scare librarians in England (Spacey, Goulding & Murray 2004). The lack of necessary skills is widely reported across the literature as a contributing factor for low use of social media tools. Thanuskodi (2012) reported that lack of social media skills amongst library staff discourages them from using these technologies and this has prompted library managers to periodically conduct computer and Internet training for their staff. Ezeani and Igwesi (2012) revealed that lack of awareness and training amongst the library professionals in Nigeria has drastically contributed 2to the non -use of social media in the library environment. Other factors include poor Internet bandwidth (Munatsi 2010; Makori 2011), frequent blackouts and Internet filtering (Sarrafzadeh, Hazeri & Alavi 2011). The reviewed literature shows that despite several obstacles the implementation of social media is advancing, and the applications will likely continue to play a pivotal 17role in library service provision in the future. It has been discussed above that social media tools bring a wide range of benefits to academic libraries hence the need to promote their integration and implantation. The sections that follow discuss the key findings of the study. 4 Discussion of findings The findings of the study, which investigated the use of social media by librarians at UWC, South Africa and NUST, Zimbabwe, will be discussed below. It provides a detailed reflection of the findings based on the librarians’ awareness and familiarity, purposes for use, advantages and disadvantages and factors for 36use and non- use of social media. 4.1 Librarians’ awareness and familiarity with diverse social media In this study, awareness and familiarity of librarians with different social media applications is measured through finding out the general librarians’ awareness 15of the existence of specific social media applications, duration of using social media, places of accessing social media and the frequency of using social media. Figure 1 below summarises responses based on librarians’ familiarity with diverse social media. Revealed in Figure 1 is that librarians from both universities were aware of Facebook, WhatsApp, Google chat, LinkedIn, Wikis, Twitter, YouTube, Skype and Blogs. Clearly shown is that UWC librarians have a higher appreciation of all social media presented to them. In contrast, NUST librarians are familiar with some of the social media platforms presented to them. Figure 1: Familiarity with social media NUST (N=29) and UWC (N=43) Figure 2 below reveals that 26 (89.7%) NUST and 43 (100%) UWC librarians both mostly accessed social media at home. On the other hand, only three (7%) UWC and 10 (34.5%) NUST librarians access social media platforms in Internet cafes. Figure 2: Places for access NUST (N=29) and UWC (N=43) The findings show that in terms of places of access, 26 (89.7%) NUST and 43 (100%) UWC librarians accessed these tools at home. The higher number of librarians accessing these tools at home implies that they are always connected and they are frequently using these social media. This also points to the existence of blurring boundaries between professional and personal 3in terms of social media use amongst librarians. The frequency of use is fuelled by 3ease of use and usefulness of social media applications as explained by the TAM theory used in this study. More than 21 (72.4%) NUST librarians used Google chat, Facebook and WhatsApp, LinkedIn, YouTube and Twitter. Similarly, 31 (72.1%) UWC librarians used WhatsApp, Google chat; Facebook, YouTube, Twitter, LinkedIn, Blackberry Messenger and Blogs many times a day. Thus, it can be stated with certainty that Google chat, Facebook, WhatsApp, LinkedIn, YouTube and Twitter were mostly used by librarians in both libraries. Library staff had a high level of engagement with these tools because they were frequently used and librarians have been using them for a long period of time. In this line of reasoning, the TAM theory describes that individuals effectively use technology if they perceive it 21to be useful and easy to use. The researchers at World Wide Worx (2014) revealed that Blackberry messenger used to dominate all social media applications in South Africa because of the predominance of Blackberry phones phones but now WhatsApp has taken the lead. At the NUST Library most librarians were less familiar with tools such as Blackberry Messenger as a consequence of not owning a Blackberry smart phone and the high usage of WhatsApp mobile applications. One other tool NUST librarians mentioned was Yokoos, a social media tool developed in African countries and its use is widespread within Zimbabwean society since its access is coordinated by a network provider (Econet Wireless) within the country. In both libraries in the present study tools like Flickr and Picasa are never used owing to the high usage of Facebook which can also be used for photo storage and sharing purposes. This is important to mention as Chisenga and Chande-Mallya (2012) argue that some social media tools share similar functions; hence, individuals 10may not see the need for having several dedicated accounts on applications such as both Facebook and Flickr. For this reason, librarians may have found Facebook more useful in their personal and work spheres compared to Flickr and Picasa. UWC librarians are acquainted with a wider variety of social media platforms than the NUST Librarians. The reason is probably their good Internet connectivity which results from support by the Tertiary Education and Research Network of South Africa as well as a well-maintained and bigger infrastructure. This makes sense as Collins and Quan-Haase (2012) and Kwanya, Stilwell and Underwood (2012) mention that the geographical location as well as the size of the university has direct implications on the 4use of social media applications. 4.2 Personal uses of social media by librarians The study further established that although librarians from both universities were aware of the existence of wide-ranging social media technologies, they were selective in their use of some technologies. Established in the study is that all 29 (100%) NUST librarians and 38 (88.4%) UWC librarians used social media mainly for communicating with friends and family, 29 (100%) librarians at NUST and 37 (86%) librarians at UWC used the applications for entertainment, 26 (89.7%) librarians at NUST and 40 (93%) librarians at UWC used tools for keeping abreast with current news, 23 (79.3%) librarians at NUST and 38 (88.4%) librarians at UWC used the platforms for academic purposes and 19 (65.5%) librarians at NUST and 35 (81.4%) librarians at UWC use social media for archiving personal information. Social media such as Twitter, Facebook and WhatsApp were mainly used for communication and entertainment. Google Apps were mainly used for archiving information whereas YouTube was singled out to be used for entertainment. Olasina (2011) notes that social media tools such as YouTube are powerful tools for leisure amongst individuals and similarly, Si, Shi and Chen (2011) comment that tools such Wikis and RSS Feeds are mostly used for searching for information and following current events respectively. Trubitt and Overholtzer (2009:91) state that librarians have incorporated these applications into their daily routines, using “Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, online gaming environments, and other tools to build and maintain complex webs of professional and personal relationships”. 4.3 Work uses of social media by librarians At work 28 (96.6%) NUST librarians and 39 (90.7%) UWC librarians use these tools to offer reference services and to share work ideas with colleagues. Twenty-eight (96.6%) NUST librarians and 37 (86%) UWC librarians use 30social media to interact with the users and to deliver Information Literacy programmes. At NUST 27 (93.1%) librarians and 36 (83.7%) library staff at UWC use the social applications to collaborate with colleagues in other libraries. Figure 3 and 4 below provides a summary of the responses from NUST and UWC respectively. Figure 3: 2Use of social media tools in work spaces NUST (N=29) Figure 4: 2Use of social media tools in work spaces at UWC (N=43) 4The use of social media at NUST for work purposes was only confined to the IT personnel and Subject Librarians while at UWC, librarians’ use differed with one’s position. The differences revealed in the study between job titles, qualifications, responsibilities and seniority 8in the use of social media explains some of the uses which were specific to particular librarians. For example, library evaluation (surveys, monitoring usage patterns) was conducted by the Deputy Director of the UWC Library which is a senior management position. 12 The study showed that personal use had a decisive effect 34on the use of social media tools at work, that is, if an individual does not use them personally it becomes difficult for them to use them at work. As one librarian expressed: “one has to be familiar with the tools personally to effectively use them otherwise they can be useless at work”. In relation to the present study, librarians in both libraries have adopted and are 8using social media tools in their personal and work spheres. However, the pervasiveness and permeation of social media applications in librarians’ everyday lives has resulted in blurred boundaries between their work and private lives, as these tools may be used anywhere and anytime. Reinforcing these findings is Olasina (2011) who argues that there is very little difference between uses of social media professionally and personally. Hence, this has led to management employing restrictive measures against the use of these tools at work. UWC Library mostly used these tools for marketing its services, the NUST Library mainly used these tools for reference services. These results at both libraries confirm observations made by Charnigo and Barnett-Ellis (2007) and Baro, Ebiagbe and Godfrey (2013) that librarians are using social media in different ways according to their own requirements. For example, Ebiagbe and Godfrey (2013) found that librarians in South Africa used these tools for announcing library news while in Nigeria only a few librarians used the tools for the same purpose. 4.4 Factors influencing the use of social media Several factors motivate librarians to use social media and these are shown below where Figure 5 represents NUST while Figure 6 represents UWC. All 29(100%) NUST librarians while 41 (95.3%) UWC librarians were encouraged by ease of use. Librarians at UWC 40 (93%) and librarians at NUST 28 (96.6%) mentioned that they were encouraged by the usefulness of social media tools. At NUST 22 (75.9%) and at UWC 36 (83.7%) indicated that they were motivated by their own commitment, cooperation. Figure 5: Factors influencing 3the use of social media tools at NUST (N=29) Figure 6: Factors influencing 3the use of social media tools at UWC (N=43) Over 75% of librarians in both universities identified three similar factors which motivate them to use social media. These factors are “ease of use” and “usefulness of the tools” as well as “personal drive”. These trends reflect the TAM theory which holds that if an individual finds technological applications easy to use and useful (adding value to their work) they are bound to adopt and appreciate these tools. Arif 14 and Mahmood (2012) and Hosseini and Hashempour (2012) reported similar findings that frequency of use is directly affected by social media’s ease of use. The study revealed that library clients’ high usage of these tools has led to their adoption and use by academic librarians. Often referred to as “convenient delivery of services anywhere and anytime” librarians are striving to keep their users from shunning the library through finding them where they are. Kwanya, Stilwell and Underwood (2012) commented that today’s patrons carry high expectations of the modern academic library as technological advancement has led them to be more “accessible” than ever before. Librarians also mentioned that the affordability of social media has heavily influenced them to use these platforms. Van Rooyen (2012) raised the point that these platforms are being used for academic purposes by most universities in South Africa because they are more relevant in the university context as they accommodate students who are financially constrained. Another motivating factor identified in this study was the availability of mobile technologies either personally or institutionally owned. The UWC library offers mobile technologies such as e-readers and iPads as shown on the library website (University of the Western Cape, 2014). Complementing this finding, although it is not clear whether the NUST Library has adopted mobile technologies, a spot check on their website revealed that the library owns a mobile site which provides a compatible format for users to access library services on their personal mobile technologies (National University of Science and Technology Library, 2014). Mobile technologies offer easy access to social media anywhere and at any time. As such, one librarian commented that “libraries will be forced to introduce mobile technologies as a way of complementing and increasing the use of these tools”. This makes sense as Chisenga and Chande-Mallya (2012: 16) emphasise that using mobile (Smart phones and Tablet PCs) and wireless Internet technologies increases the effective use of social media. 4.5 Factors for the non-use of 14social media One of the main goals of the study was to obtain the perspectives of librarians towards the factors that discourage them from using social media. Figure 7 below depicts that 25 (86.2%) NUST librarians were discouraged by lack of financial support. Also 22 (75.9%) librarians at NUST were demotivated by the absence of 15 social media policies and poor Internet access. At the UWC Library, 26 (60.5%) librarians agreed that the absence of social media policies was the only significant factor that discouraged them from using these tools, as can be seen in Figure 8 below. Figure 7: Factors influencing the non-use of social media tools at NUST (N=29) Figure 8: Factors influencing the non-use of social media tools at UWC (N=43) According to the study, one of the predominant demotivating factors which emerged across the findings is that librarians from both universities complained about applications being time consuming. Librarians clearly mentioned that mismanagement of these tools results in work time being compromised. According to Boxen (2008) and Luo (2009), some social media platforms have proved to be more technical and demand substantial amount of time from librarians in learning about them. Banda, (2011); Chisenga and Chande-Mallya (2012: 16) and Chu and Du (2013) note that librarians across the world lack time to use social media effectively. In connection with the finding above, librarians in both libraries were also concerned about the use of these applications in an academic library set-up referring to them as “informal”. This finding echoes an argument made by Sekyere (2009); Cohen (2011) and Collins and Quan-Haase (2012) that academic libraries should not waste their time and resources on platforms that are largely meant for leisure. Given this premise, the effectiveness or positive impact of 7social media in academic libraries largely depends on whether librarians take the initiative and explore and use 12this type of technology or whether they reject it outright as frivolous entertainment (Charnigo & Barnett-Ellis 2007). While the results show that the robust Internet at UWC encouraged librarians to use these tools, poor Internet was a major impediment to 4the use of social media tools at NUST. This is shown by the visible disparity between librarians in both universities where only 14 (48.2%) librarians at NUST whereas 41(95.3%) librarians at UWC were motivated by good Internet access. The dissimilarities in Internet connectivity between the two countries might be resulting from the different economic status. In Zimbabwe, university funding for Internet relies heavily on the students’ fees whilst in South Africa, tertiary institutions are supported by 5Tertiary Education and Research Network of South Africa (TENET) through the South African National Research Network (SANReN) project which offer public universities first preference, affordable and high speed networking (Wright 2011). Another major impeding factor highlighted in the study was the absence of social media policies in both libraries. Academic libraries are known to prefer the formulation of social media policies as situations arise (Kooy & Steiner 2010). This is 17 a serious risk as this might be a loophole for some individuals to misuse the applications, as social media policies provide guidance in how to manage time, mode of expression and content (Oosman, McMillan & Bell 2014). Therefore, there is an urgent need to put in place social media policies which will govern the use of these applications by librarians. What also emerged is that, according to a respondent at UWC, most social media policies are inflexible thereby restricting creativity and spontaneity amongst librarians which in turn contribute 27to the ineffective use of social media. Johnson and Burclaff (2013) comment that most social media policies are risk-averse since these technologies are subject to abuse, lack security and privacy. 5 Concluding remarks The study established that the two academic libraries, UWC in South Africa, and NUST in Zimbabwe are still trying to find their feet with social media. At the same time it is clear that social media is no longer foreign amongst developing countries’ libraries. The study revealed that personal use has influence on professional use and that 7there is a thin line between the use of social media for personal reasons and at work. It also emerged that librarians at both universities are well aware of the benefits and controversies that come 2with the use of social media. Social media assists librarians 35to move away from the traditional concept of librarianship. The Technological Acceptance Model played a pivotal role in helping to make sense of the findings of the study. The theoretical framework revealed that 3ease of use and usefulness of social media encouraged librarians to use and adopt the applications. The absence of social media policies is the most visible impeding factor in both libraries. Other negative factors identified are poor Internet connectivity in Zimbabwe, and the issue of time constraints. Based on the conclusions, the following recommendations are proposed: Since the study concluded that there is a thin line between use in personal and work spheres, it is important to design social media policies which govern their use at work. Therefore, both library managements should craft supportive social media policies to encourage effective use of social media tools. Both library managements should encourage their staff to constantly update their skills through staying in touch with current technological trends. The NUST Library should extend the management of social media tools to library professionals and not leave this work to IT professionals only. References Aharony, N. 2009. Web 2.0 use by librarians. Library and Information Science Research, 31 (1): 29-37. Aharony, N. 2013. Factors affecting the adoption of Facebook by information professionals. [Online]. https://www.asis.org/asist2013/proceedings/submissions/.../8paper.pdf (20 August 2013). Arif, M. and Mahmood, K. 2012. The changing role of librarians in the digital world: adoption of Web 2.0 technologies by Pakistani librarians. The Electronic Library, 30 (4): 469-479. Banda, C. 2011. Use of social networking tools in libraries in Zambia. [Online]. http://justinchisenga.blogspot.com/2011/08/social-networking-tools-in-libraries-in.html (22 August 2013). Baro, E.E., Ebiagbe, E.J. and Godfrey, V.Z. 2013. Web 2.0 tools usage: a comparative study of librarians in university libraries in Nigeria and South Africa. Library Hi Tech, 5 (1): 10-20. Blank, G. and Reisdorf, B.C. 2012. The participatory Web. Information, Communication and Society, 15(4): 537-554. Boxen, J. 2008. Library 2.0: a review of the literature. The Reference Librarian, 49 (1): 21- 34. Charnigo, L. and Barnett-Ellis, P. 2007. Checking out Facebook.com: the impact of a digital trend on academic libraries. Information Technology and Libraries, 26 (1): 23- 34. Chisenga, J. and Chande-Mallya, R. 2012. Social media and professional networking: a case of information professionals in the SCECSAL region. [Online]. http://scecsal.viel.co.ke/images/c/c0/Social_Media_and_Professional_Networking_A 19 _Case_o f_Information_Professionals_in_the_SCECSAL_Region.pdf (25 September 2014). Chitanana, L. 2012. Bandwidth management in universities in Zimbabwe: towards a responsible user base through effective policy implementation. International Journal of Education and Development using Information and Communication Technology, 8 (2): 62-76. Chu, S.K. and Du, H.S. 2013. Social networking tools for academic libraries. Journal of Library and Information Science, 45 (1): 64-75. Cohen, H. 2012. 30 social media definitions. [Online]. http://heidicohen.com/social-media-definition/ (27 August 2014). Collins, G. and Quan-Haase, A. 2012. Social media and academic libraries: current trends and future challenges. [Online]. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/meet.14504901272/abstract (13 June 2013). Ezeani, C. N. and Igwesi, U. 2012. Using social media for dynamic library services delivery: the Nigerian experience. [Online]. http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/libphilprac/814 (15 June 2013). Farkas, M. 2012. Participatory technologies, pedagogy 2.0 and information literacy. Library Hi Tech, 30 (1): 82-94. Fernandez-Villavicencio, N.G. 2010.Helping students become literate in a digital, networking based society: a literature review and discussion. International Information and Library Review, 42 (1): 124-136. Gauntner Witte, G. 2014. Content generation and social network interaction within academic library Facebook pages. Journal of Electronic Resources Librarianship, 26 (2): 89-100. Gerolimos, M. and Konsta, R. 2011. Services for academic libraries in the new era. The Magazine of Digital Library Research, 17 (8): 1-13. Harinarayana, N. and Raju V. 2010. Web 2.0 features in university library web sites. The Electronic Library, 28 (3): 69-88. Hosseini, E. and Hashempour, L. 2012. The status of librarians’ knowledge sharing by the usage of Web 2.0 tools: a case study of central libraries of Tabriz governmental universities. Communications in Computer and Information Science, 317: 128-137. Johnson, C. and Burclaff, N. 2013. Making social media meaningful: connecting missions and policies. [Online]. http://www.ala.org/acrl/sites/ala.org.acrl/files/content/conferences/confsandpreconfs/ 201 3/papers/JohnsonBurclaff_Making.pdf (25 March 2014). Kibugi, S. 2013. The use of social media in the dissemination of information in selected public and private university libraries in Kenya. Innovation, 47 (1): 101-120. Kim, Y. and Abbas, J. 2010. Adoption of Library 2.0 functionalities by academic libraries and users: a knowledge management perspective. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 36 (3): 211-218. Kooy, B.K. and Steiner, S. K. 2010. Protection, not barriers: using social software policies to guide and safeguard students and employees. Reference and User Services Quarterly, 50 (1): 59-71. Kwanya, T., Stilwell, C., and Underwood, P.G. 2012. Techno-stress and techno-lust: coping mechanisms among academic librarians in Eastern and Southern Africa. [Online]. www.globdev.org/files/ICTM2012_Proceedings.pdf (22 August 2014). Luo, L. 2009. Web 2.0 integration in information literacy instruction: an overview. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 36 (1): 32-40. Mahmood, K. 2011. Impact of Web 2.0 technologies on US academic libraries: a study of ARL libraries. Lahore: University of the Punjab, PhD thesis. Makori, E. O. 2011. Bridging the information gap with the patrons in university libraries in Africa: the case for investments in Web 2.0 systems. Library Review, 61 (4): 340-350. Moran, B.B. and Leonard, E. 2009. Academic Librarianship. In: Encyclopaedia of Library and Information Sciences. (3rd ed.) New York: Taylor Francis, 1–10. Munatsi, R. 2010. Implementation of library 2.0 services in African academic and research libraries: need for fundamental rethink. [Online]. http://www.scecsal.org/conferences/2010/spapers2010.pdf (15 June 2013). National University of Science and Technology Library. 2014. [Online]. http://library.nust.ac.zw/ (20 September 2014). Nfila, R. B. 2010. Academic libraries support for e-learning: initiatives and opportunities the case of University of Botswana Library. [Online] http://www.ais.up.ac.za/digi/docs/nfila_paper.pdf (8 June 2013). Olasina, G. 2011. The use of Web 2.0 tools and social networking sites by librarians, information professionals, and other professionals in the workplaces in Nigeria. PNLA Quarterly, 75 (3): 11-39. O’Leary, Z. 2004. The essential guide to research. London: Sage publications. Oosman, A., McMillan, J. and Bell, J. 2014. Use of social media by library the library: current practices and future opportunities. [Online]. http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals/access/white-paper-social-media.pdf (5 January 2014). Penzhorn, C. 2013. The use of social media in teaching a campus-wide information literacy course. Mousaion, 31 (3): 57-73. Penzhorn, C. and Pienaar, H. 2009. The use of social networking tools for innovative delivery at the University of Pretoria library. Innovation, 36 (1): 66-77. Rogers, C.R. 2009. Social media, libraries and Web 2.0: how American libraries are using new tools for public relations and to attract new users. [Online]. http://dc.statelibrary.sc.gov/bitstream/handle/10827/7271/SCSL_Social_Media_Librar ies2011.pdf?sequence=1 (26 August 2013). Sarrafzadeh, M., Hazeri A. and Alavi, S. 2011. The status of Web 2.0 in Iran’s LIS education. Education for Information, 28 (2): 233-245. Sekyere, K. 2009. Too much hullabaloo about Facebook in Libraries: is it really helping libraries? Nebraska Library Association Quarterly, 40 (2): 25-37. Si, L., Shi, R. and Chen, B. 2011. An investigation and analysis of the application of Web 2.0 in Chinese university libraries. The Electronic Library, 29 (5): 651-668. Spacey, R., Goulding, A. and Murray, I. 2004. Exploring the attitudes of the public library staff to the Internet using the TAM. Journal of Documentation, 60 (5): 550-564. Stephens, M. 2006. Exploring Web 2.0 and libraries. Library Technology Reports, 42 (6): 8-14. Thanuskodi, S. 2012. Awareness of library 2.0 applications among library and information science professionals at Annamalai University, India. International Journal of Library Science, 1 (5): 75-83. Tripathi, M. and Kumar, S. 2010. Use of Web 2.0 tools in academic libraries: reconnaissance of the international landscape. The International Information and Library Review, 42 (3): 195-207. Trubitt, L. and Overholtzer, J. 2009. Good communication: the other social network for successful IT organizations. EDUCAUSE Review, 44 (6): 90-98. University of the Western Cape Library. 2014. [Online]. http://lib.uwc.ac.za/ (20 September 2014). Van Rooyen, A. 2012. Student experiences of technology integration at UNISA. Progressio, 1 (1): 1-7. Vanwynsberghe, H., Vanderlinde, R., Georges, A. and Verdegem, P. 2015. The librarian 2.0: identifying a typology of librarians' social media literacy. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science, 47(4): 283-293. Vermeulen, J. 2013. WhatsApp vs BBM vs MXit vs 2go in South Africa. [Online]. http://mybroadband.co.za/news/internet/86783-whatsapp-vs-bbm-vs-mxit-vs-2go-in- south-africa.html (21 August 2014). World Wide Worx. 2014. South African Social Media Landscape 2014. [Online]. http://www.worldwideworx.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/Exec-Summary-Social- Media-2014.pdf (11 November 2014). Xu, C., Ouyang, F. and Chu, H. 2009. The academic library meets Web 2.0: applications and implications. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 35 (4): 324- 331. 1 2 3 4 7 8 9 10 11 13 16 18 20 21 22 23 24