LibQUAL+LibQUAL+™™ Project Goals Project Goals

Establishment of a library service quality assessment program at ARL

Development of web-based tools for assessing library service quality

Development of mechanisms and protocols for evaluating libraries

Identification of best practices in providing library service

LibQUAL+LibQUAL+TM TM ParticipantsParticipants

Year 1

Year 2

Year 3

Spring 2001Spring 2000 Spring 2002

12 Participants

43 Participants

164 Participants

For More Information about Participants:

Visit the LibQUAL+ web site.

Relationships: perceptions, Relationships: perceptions, service quality and satisfactionservice quality and satisfaction

….only customers judge quality;all other judgments are essentiallyirrelevant”

Zeithaml, Parasuraman, Berry. (1999). Delivering quality service. NY: The Free Press.

Source: Parasuraman, ARL Symposium on Measuring Service QualityWashington, DC, October 2000

Dimensions of LibraryDimensions of LibraryService QualityService Quality

Affect of Service

Empathy

Information Access

Personal Control

Responsiveness

Symbol

Utilitarian space

Assurance

Scope

Timeliness

Convenience

Library as Place

LibraryServiceQuality

Refuge

Reliability

Ease of Navigation

Convenience

Modern Equipment

Affect of ServiceAffect of Service

Emerged as the dominant factor early in our work

Absorbed several of the original SERVQUAL questions measuring Responsiveness, Assurance and Empathy

In the current analysis also includes Reliability

All in all: the Human Dimension of Service Quality

Library as PlaceLibrary as Place

Transcends the SERVQUAL dimension of Tangibles to include the idea of the library as the campus center of intellectual activity

As long as physical facilities are adequate, library as place may not be an issue

Personal ControlPersonal Control

How users want to interact with the modern library

Personal control of the information universe in general and web navigation in particular

Access to InformationAccess to Information

Ubiquity of access: information delivered in the format, location and time of choice

Comprehensive collections

Sample SurveySample SurveySpring 2002Spring 2002

Sample Survey…Sample Survey…continuedcontinued

42 — ARL Libraries 35 — Health Sciences Libraries 36 — State Colleges & Universities

(excluding ARL) 34 — Private Colleges & Universities

(excluding ARL) 15 — Community Colleges 2 — Special & Public Libraries

(Smithsonian & NYPL)

LibQUAL+LibQUAL+ 2002 Iteration 2002 Iteration

The Challenge of AnalysisThe Challenge of Analysis

There are few, if any useful conclusions to be drawn from aggregate data of all institutions, because their missions and subsequent user expectations for service are too diverse.

There are commonalities in service delivery profiles that merit further investigation.

In the long run, information that may be derived from demographic responses of individuals may yield the richest data.

Note: LibQUAL+ Spring 2002 Survey Results - AAHSL. (2002). Vol. 3, p. 14

Respondents by Age Respondents by Age


Respondents by SexRespondents by Sex


AAHSL Respondents by DisciplineAAHSL Respondents by Discipline(n=13,976)(n=13,976)


ARL AAHSL ALL

Service Affect .9335 .9383 .9359

Information Access .7257 .7310 .7329

Personal Control .8574 .8683 .8632

Library as Place .8803 .8841 .8822

Total .9440 .9462 .9466

ReliabilityReliability

Factor Analysis - ARLFactor Analysis - ARL

Factor 1 Factor 2 Factor 3 Factor 4

PER1 .74074 .09798 .22813 .13893

PER4 .76968 .14880 .16621 .11769

PER11 .61345 .20213 .30223 .28547

PER14 .72741 .21757 .20249 .16775

PER15 .81164 .20597 .16619 .14916

PER17 .70031 .16445 .26015 .26475

PER18 .77420 .14916 .23639 .22295

PER20 .70169 .20824 .10965 .25935

PER24 .72519 .22845 .18688 .30158

PER2 .14912 .76235 .18906 .09831

PER10 .15863 .82368 .15950 .13835

PER13 .22709 .76898 .14131 .16375

PER21 .25095 .66728 .13458 .28148

PER23 .20175 .80210 .09136 .24419

PER3 .14712 .17182 .24653 .63352

PER8 .24266 .06548 .20828 .59560

PER9 .24572 .14733 .18770 .62711

PER19 .23741 .24919 .15997 .40427

PER22 .17337 .27128 .16268 .69340

PER5 .17869 .11786 .68164 .18534

PER6 .26893 .22800 .65036 .26280

PER7 .19832 .12850 .77579 .20734

PER12 .32984 .17789 .67501 .25145

PER16 .40452 .19759 .61748 .29265

PER25 .34270 .25664 .31022 .48590

Willingness to help users

Employees who are consistently cou

Dependability handling users^ serv

Giving users individual attention

Employees deal w users in a caring

Employees knowledge to answer user

Readiness to respond to users^ que

Employees who instill confidence I

Employees understand needs of thei

Space that facilitates quiet study

A haven for quiet and solitude

A place for reflection and creativ

A comfortable and inviting locatio

A contemplative environment

Complete runs of journal titles

Timely document delivery/interlibr

Interdisc library needs being addr

Convenient business hours

Comprehensive print collections

Elec resources accessible from hom

Modern equip me easily access the

Lib website enabling me locate inf

Easy-use tools allow find things o

Info easily accessible for indepen

Convenient access to library colle

Service Affect

Library as place

Access to info

Personal Control

Factor Analysis -AAHSLFactor Analysis -AAHSL

Factor 1 Factor 2 Factor 3 Factor 4

PER1 .74631 .11193 .23375 .15152

PER4 .78240 .15032 .16335 .09452

PER11 .62759 .21557 .32707 .25809

PER14 .73143 .22974 .20182 .17303

PER15 .81467 .20547 .17480 .13066

PER17 .72294 .17970 .30102 .21068

PER18 .79667 .15323 .24718 .16878

PER20 .70351 .25903 .13907 .20958

PER24 .72570 .25733 .23291 .23868

PER2 .15321 .75156 .17717 .08914

PER10 .16388 .81570 .15353 .12552

PER13 .21241 .78659 .12056 .14568

PER21 .25498 .69526 .17995 .17608

PER23 .21213 .80711 .10798 .19988

PER3 .11562 .16898 .34314 .62728

PER8 .27914 .08067 .15292 .67910

PER9 .27207 .17922 .12047 .69040

PER19 .32467 .34887 .24917 .14587

PER22 .14463 .28043 .28386 .64062

PER5 .15637 .12099 .71391 .18215

PER6 .30260 .25939 .65716 .19358

PER7 .25847 .12895 .75553 .19686

PER12 .36238 .18757 .66909 .22491

PER16 .42692 .21819 .65005 .22073

PER25 .34239 .28441 .40182 .38419

Willingness to help users

Employees who are consistently cou

Dependability handling users^ serv

Giving users individual attention

Employees deal w users in a caring

Employees knowledge to answer user

Readiness to respond to users^ que

Employees who instill confidence I

Employees understand needs of thei

Space that facilitates quiet study

A haven for quiet and solitude

A place for reflection and creativ

A comfortable and inviting locatio

A contemplative environment

Complete runs of journal titles

Timely document delivery/interlibr

Interdisc library needs being addr

Convenient business hours

Comprehensive print collections

Elec resources accessible from hom

Modern equip me easily access the

Lib website enabling me locate inf

Easy-use tools allow find things o

Info easily accessible for indepen

Convenient access to library colle

Service Affect

Library as place

Access to info

Personal Control

Dimension Minimum Desired Perceived SA Gap

Access to Information 6.62 7.95 6.92 0.31

Affect of Service 6.62 7.95 7.34 0.72

Library as Place 5.95 7.34 6.79 0.84

Personal Control 6.82 8.20 7.15 0.33

AAHSL Dimension MeansAAHSL Dimension Means(n=13,976)(n=13,976)


6.0000

6.2000

6.4000

6.6000

6.8000

7.0000

7.2000

6.0000 6.2000 6.4000 6.6000 6.8000 7.0000 7.2000

2001 Data

2002 D

ata

Mean Perceived ScoresMean Perceived Scores2001/2002 Trend 2001/2002 Trend

(n=34)(n=34)

Two Interpretation Two Interpretation FrameworksFrameworks

Score Norms

Zone of Tolerance

Zone of ToleranceZone of Tolerance

The area between minimally acceptable and desired service quality ratings

Perception ratings ideally fall within the Zone of Tolerance

AAHSL DimensionAAHSL DimensionSummary Summary

(n=13,976)(n=13,976)


Ave

rage

Rat

ing

9.0

8.0

7.0

6.0

5.0

4.0

3.0

2.0Access to

InformationAffect of Service

Library as PlacePersonal Control

Undergraduate AAHSL Undergraduate AAHSL (n=638)(n=638)


Graduate AAHSL Graduate AAHSL (n=4,788)(n=4,788)


Faculty AAHSL Faculty AAHSL (n=4,962)(n=4,962)


Library Staff AAHSL Library Staff AAHSL (n=431)(n=431)


Local Questions - Faculty Local Questions - Faculty AAHSLAAHSL


Score NormsScore Norms

Norm Conversion Tables facilitate the interpretation of observed scores using norms created for a large and representative sample.

LibQUAL+TM norms have been created at both the individual and institutional level

Institutional Norms for Perceived Institutional Norms for Perceived Means on 25 Core Questions-AAHSLMeans on 25 Core Questions-AAHSL

Note: Thompson, B. LibQUAL+ Spring 2002 Selected Norms, (2002).

ARLTop 40

6.84(.46)

ARLOther6.74(.27)

PrivateColleges

6.90(.49)

State Colleges& Universities

6.38(.30)

CommunityColleges

7.26(.55)

Overall Mean Scores and Overall Mean Scores and Service Adequacy Gap ScoresService Adequacy Gap ScoresBy Cohort GroupBy Cohort Group

2002 LibQUAL+2002 LibQUAL+ Iteration Iteration(n=162)(n=162)

AAHSL7.07(.56)

LibQUAL+LibQUAL+™ ™ Fundamental Contributions Fundamental Contributions to the Measurement of Effective Delivery to the Measurement of Effective Delivery

of Library Servicesof Library Services

Shift the focus of assessment from mechanical expenditure-driven metrics to user-centered measures of quality

Re-ground gap theory for the library sector, especially academic libraries

Grounded questions yield data of sufficient granularity to be of value at the local level

Determine the degree to which information derived from local data can be generalized, providing much needed “best practices” information

Demonstrate the efficacy of large-scale administration of user-centered assessment transparently across the web

Makes little demand of local resources and expertise

Recognize the limitations of Recognize the limitations of listening to customerslistening to customers

Customers have a limited frame of reference and tend to offer incremental, rather than bold, suggestions

– A better slide rule

– The microwave oven, Post-it Notes, Velcro

Innovation is the responsibility of staff

Anthony W. Ulwick, Harvard Business Review, January 2002

Shift the focus to outcomesShift the focus to outcomes

Plan outcome-based customer interviews Capture desired outcomes Organize the outcomes Rate the outcomes for importance and satisfaction

– Opportunity algorithm:

(Importance+(Importance-Satisfaction)=Opportunity) Use the outcomes to jump-start innovation


When desired outcomes When desired outcomes become the focus of customer become the focus of customer research, innovation becomes research, innovation becomes

a manageable, predictable a manageable, predictable discipline.discipline.


SummarySummary Survey can handle large numbers Survey can be turned around quickly Limited local expertise required Interpretations should be across chosen

cohorts Lots of opportunities for using demographics

to discern user behaviors Q-technique and other tests will provide

opportunities to observe how institutions may cluster

LibQUAL+LibQUAL+ Related Related DocumentsDocuments

LibQUAL+LibQUAL+ Web Site http://www.libqual.org

LibQUAL+LibQUAL+ Bibliographyhttp://www.coe.tamu.edu/~bthompson/servqbib

Survey Participants Procedures Manual http://www.arl.org/libqual/procedure/lqmanual2.pdf

Project web site old.libqual

Documents

Transcript of Project web site old.libqual