LibQUAL+ TM at the University of Lethbridge 2005 January 26 L. Jacobs.

LibQUAL+TM at the

University of Lethbridge

2005 January 26L. Jacobs

L. Jacobs 22005 January 26

What is LibQUAL+TM

Why LibQUAL+TM

UofL and LibQUAL+TM

Life after LibQUAL+TM

LibQUAL+TM at the University of Lethbridge


UofL Enrollment Trend(UofL Facts Book, 2003-2004)

Annual FLE, 1994-95 to 2003-2004

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

8000

9000

10000

1994/95 1995/96 1996/97* 1997/98* 1998/99* 1999/00 2000/01 2001/02 2002/03 2003/04

Years

En

rollm

en

t

Enrollment


Library trends…in circ, ILL (UofL Facts Book, 2003-2004)

Circulation & ILL, 1994-95 to 2003-04

0

20000

40000

60000

80000

100000

120000

140000

160000

180000

200000

1994/95 1995/96 1996/97* 1997/98* 1998/99* 1999/00 2000/01 2001/02 2002/03 2003/04

Years

Tra

ns

ac

tio

ns

Circulation Transactions

ILL Transactions


Library trends…in reference (UofL Facts Book, 2003-2004)

Reference Transactions

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

1994/95 1995/96 1996/97* 1997/98* 1998/99* 1999/00 2000/01 2001/02 2002/03 2003/04

Years

Re

fere

nc

e T

ran

sa

cti

on

s

Reference Transactions


“suite of services used to solicit, track, understand, and act upon users’ opinions of service quality”

Provided by Association of Research Libraries (ARL)

What is LibQUAL+ TM


Web-based survey 22 core questions A box

Management of survey data Results notebook Raw data Training on understanding and using results

A suite of Services?


“suite of services used to solicit, track, understand, and act upon users’ opinions of service quality”

What is LibQUAL+ TM


All programs, activities, facilities, etc. of an organization, which have a bearing on users' experiences during and as a result of their interactions with the organization.

Focuses on the users' personal and emotional reaction to service

http://www.libqual.org/About/FAQ/index.cfm#FAQ25

Definitions: Customer Service


the users' assessment of how good/bad, or pleasant/unpleasant their experiences are

the users' subjective evaluation of “customer service”

http://www.libqual.org/About/FAQ/index.cfm#FAQ25

Definitions: Service Quality


The General premise of LibQUAL+ TM

Perceptions Service

“… only customers judge quality; all other judgements are essentially irrelevant”

NOTE: Zeithaml, Parasuraman, and Berry. (1999). Delivering quality service. New York: The Free Press.


Provides a snapshot or discrete summaries of users' evaluation of their experiences with the Library

Focuses on three “dimensions” of library service:Affect of serviceLibrary as place Information control

What is LibQUAL+ TM


ServQUAL (developed by Parasuraman, et.al.) ARL partnered with Texas A&M University to

develop, test, and refine LibQUAL+TM

Originally funded through U.S. Dept. of Education, Improvement in Post-Secondary Education

Since August 2003, self-sustaining through ARL Statistics and Measurements Program

How was LibQUAL+ TM developed?


York University (Canada)

University of Arizona Arizona State University of

Connecticut University of Houston University of Kansas

University of Minnesota University of

Pennsylvania University of

Washington Smithsonian Institution Northwestern Medical

76 Interviews Conducted Source: Fred Heath, University of Texas at Austin , presented at La Calidad en las Bibliotecas Conferencia Palma de Mallorca, January 13-14, 2005


Source: Fred Heath, University of Texas at Austin , presented at La Calidad en las Bibliotecas Conferencia Palma de Mallorca, January 13-14, 2005

LoadedPT:P1:01xxxxxxxxxxxxxx.txt,S:\Admin\Colleen\ServQual Interviews\TEXT Only\01xxxxxxxxx.txt (redirected: c:\zz\atlasti\fred



13 LibrariesEnglish LibQUAL+™ Version

4000 Respondents

QUAL

QUAN

QUAL

QUAL

QUAN

QUAL

PURPOSE DATA ANALYSIS PRODUCT/RESULTDescribe library environment;build theory of library service quality from user perspective

Test LibQUAL+™instrument

Refine theoryof service quality

Refine LibQUAL+™instrument

Test LibQUAL+™instrument

Refine theory

Unstructured interviewsat 8 ARL institutions

Web-delivered survey

Unstructured interviews at Health Sciences and the Smithsonian libraries

E-mail to surveyadministrators

Web-delivered survey

Focus groups

Content analysis:(cards & Atlas TI)

Reliability/validityanalyses: CronbachsAlpha, factor analysis,SEM, descriptive statistics

Content analysis

Content analysis

Reliability/validity analyses including Cronbachs Alpha,factor analysis, SEM, descriptive statistics

Content analysis

VignetteRe-tooling

Iterative

Emergent2000

2004315 Libraries English, Dutch, Swedish,

German LibQUAL+™ Versions160,000 anticipated respondents

LibQUAL+LibQUAL+™™ ProjectProject

Case studies1

Valid LibQUAL+™ protocol

Scalable process

Enhanced understanding of user-centered views of service quality in the library environment2

Cultural perspective3

Refined survey delivery process and theory of service quality4

Refined LibQUAL+™instrument5

Local contextual understanding of LibQUAL+™ survey responses6


Source: Colleen Cook & Bruce Thomspson, Presented to Library Assessment and Benchmarking Institute SLA/FEDLINK, September 14, 2002

Empathy

Ubiquity and Ease of Access

Comprehensive Collections

Reliability

Responsiveness

Symbol

Utilitarian space

Assurance

Formats

Timely access to resources

Physical location

Self-reliance Library as Place

LibraryServiceQuality

Figure 1: Dimensions of Library Service Quality

?

Refuge

Affect of Service



2000 2001 2002 200341-items 56-items 25-items 22-items

Affect of Service

Affect of Service

Service Affect Service Affect

Reliability Library as Place

Library as Place

Library as Place

Library as Place

Reliability Personal Control

Information Control

Provision of Physical

Collections

Self-Reliance Information Access

Access to Information

Access to Information



Dimensions ofLibrary Service Quality

Empathy

InformationControl

Responsiveness

Symbol

Utilitarian space

Assurance

Scope of Content

Ease of Navigation

Self-Reliance

Library as Place

LibraryServiceQuality

Model 3

Refuge

Affect of Service

Reliability

Convenience

Timeliness

Equipment


Minimum expectation of service Desired expectation of service Perceived quality of service

So what is being measured?


The Gap Analysis …

Source: Colleen Cook and Bruce Thompson, Presented at the LibQUAL+(TM) International Workshop, at The Whitworth Conference Center at the Royal Military College of Science, Cranfield University, Shrivenham, UK, 1/20/2005 - 1/21/2005.


NOTE: Martha Kyrillidou, “22 items and a box”, A webcast introduction to LibQUAL+TM, January 11, 2005.

Key to the Bar Charts


ARL has found: About 40% of respondents provide open-ended

comments which can be linked to demographic data and quantitative data

Users tend to elaborate on their responses to the quantitative scales – basis for followup

Users feel the need to be constructive in their criticism and provide suggestions for action

And a Box …


Five “local” questions Selected from 108 questions used in previous

years (Document delivery (1), promotion (1), information literacy (3))

Overall satisfaction questions Library usage patterns (i.e., in person, via

website, use of non-library gateways) Demographic information (e.g., age, sex,

discipline, constituency group)

Additional info collected …


Goals of LibQUAL+TM: Foster a culture of excellence in providing library

service Help libraries better understand user perceptions

of library service quality Collect and interpret library user feedback

systematically over time

Why LibQUAL+TM … what are we trying to accomplish?


Goals of LibQUAL+TM (cont’d): Provide libraries with comparable assessment

information from peer institutions Identify best practices in library service Enhance library staff members’ analytical skills

for interpreting and acting on data

Why LibQUAL+TM … what are we trying to accomplish?


Assess whether we are meeting user expectations … identify: what are we doing well; what can we improve on what we need to focus on fixing what we need to learn more about re: expectations

Compare our performance to other libraries (i.e., establish best practices) Identify new services and how we might improve

existing services

Benefit to ANY Library …


Establish a baseline assessment of users’ perceptions of our services

Provide direction about where to focus our efforts and resources

Provide a foundation for developing performance indicators for library services

?????

Benefit to THIS Library …


WHO? Focus on university population

All facultyAll graduate studentsSample of undergraduate students

(1500/~7500 or ~20%)All staffAll library staff

UofL and LibQUAL+TM


WHEN? Survey will run from February 28 to March

19 Letter of invitation from University

Librarian (Feb.28) Weekly followup reminders

UofL and LibQUAL+TM


Promotion (PR Committee): Posters Screensavers The Melorist - Three Lines Free The Legend Website (under construction) Incentive (five $100 UofL Bookstore certificates)

UofL and LibQUAL+TM …


TIMELINE: 2004 Sep: register 2004 Oct: cleared by HSRC 2004 Nov: UofL Branding 2004 Dec – 2005 Jan: customization & testing; sampling 2005 Feb-Mar: run survey 2005 Apr-Jun: raw data; incentive awards 2005 May: analysis (ARL) 2005 Jun: receive results notebook 2005 July and onwards: followup

UofL and LibQUAL+TM …


In the short term …

What we learn will determine how we proceed …Focus groups?Targeted surveys?Outcomes assessment?

Life after LibQUAL+TM?


In the long term … LibQUAL+TM is rarely (if ever) a one-shot deal for

libraries. How do you know if you have improved if you don’t continue to measure?

Recommended MINIMUM frequency for repeating LibQUAL+TM is 3 years … if you want to stay ahead of evolving user needs (Colleen Cook, Boston, 2005-01-17)

Life after LibQUAL+TM?


UofL website: www.uleth.ca/lib/libqual.asp LibQUAL+TM project website:

www.libqual.org email: [email protected] phone: 329-2008 office: L1140

If there are questions … your own or from a user

LibQUAL+ TM at the University of Lethbridge 2005 January 26 L. Jacobs.

Documents

Transcript of LibQUAL+ TM at the University of Lethbridge 2005 January 26 L. Jacobs.