Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Effectively utilising LibQUAL+ data
J. Stephen Town
Further analysis conducted at Cranfield
• Campus library results– Results notebook recreated for each campus library
• Results by discipline • Comparisons between PhD and Masters
students• Exploring specific issues• Detailed analysis of comments (time consuming++)
• Longitudinal analysis• Internal benchmarking • External benchmarking
– SCONUL & ARL average– Peer-to-peer
Campus Library Results
Overall CU Results 2007
Two Campus Results from CU, 2007
DCMT Results 2007
ID Question TextSuperiority
MeanDesired
Rank
IC-1 Making electronic resources accessible from my home or office -0.79 3
IC-4 The electronic information resources I need -0.73 1
IC-2 A library Web site enabling me to locate information on my own -0.72 5
IC-8 Print and/or electronic journal collections I require for my work -0.62 2
IC-6 Easy-to-use access tools that allow me to find things on my own-0.58 5
IC-3 The printed library materials I need for my work -0.56 6
LP-1 Library space that inspires study and learning -0.56 16
LP-2 Quiet space for individual work -0.54 18
IC-5 Modern equipment that lets me easily access needed information -0.50 7
LP-4 A haven for study, learning, or research -0.39 15
IC-7 Making information easily accessible for independent use -0.32 4
AS-5 Library staff who have the knowledge to answer user questions -0.09 10
AS-9 Dependability in handling users' service problems -0.06 11
DCMT Results 2007
ID Question TextSuperiority
MeanDesired
Rank
LP-3 A comfortable and inviting location 0.00 14
AS-1 Library staff who instill confidence in users 0.04 12
LP-5 Space for group learning and group study 0.07 19
AS-7 Library staff who understand the needs of their users 0.09 11
AS-4 Readiness to respond to users' enquiries 0.18 1
AS-8 Willingness to help users 0.22 9
AS-6 Library staff who deal with users in a caring fashion 0.38 13
AS-3 Library staff who are consistently courteous 0.40 8
AS-2 Giving users individual attention 0.41 17
Results by Discipline
Computer Science Business & Management
Exploring Issues
Making electronic resources accessible from my home or office
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Overall 2005 Overall 2006 Undergraduates2005
Undergraduates2006
Postgraduate 2005 Postgraduate2006
Academic Staff2005
Academic Staff2006
Library Staff 2005 Library Staff 2006 Staff 2005 Staff 2006
Making electronic resources accessible from my home or office
Comment Analysis
Comments 2006
• 205 Comments received overall• Results grouped by topic• Topics standardised year-on-year• Catalogued by:
– Dimension– Discipline– User group (Undergrad / Postgrad etc.)– Sex– Age
Comment AnalysisOverall commentary analysis
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Affect of Service Information Control Library as Place General
Positive
Negative
General
Highlighting Issues
The only element that needs some work is the ability to interrogate library resources from remote desktops.
PostgraduateComputing & Information TechnologyDCMT Library31 - 45MaleFull-time
The new web page of the library (electronic access to various journals) is not as good or as easy to use as before.
Academic StaffElectrical EngineeringDCMT Library31 - 45MaleDoes not apply / NA
Longitudinal Analysis
Year-on-Year Change
Overall
-0.80
-0.70
-0.60
-0.50
-0.40
-0.30
-0.20
-0.10
0.00
0.10
0.20
0.30
Su
per
iort
y M
ean
Superiority Mean 2006 -0.03 -0.70 -0.35 -0.35
Superiority Mean 2007 0.17 -0.60 -0.29 -0.21
Difference (06 - 07) 0.20 0.10 0.06 0.14
Affect of Service Information Control Library as Place Overall
Changes over the years
Internal Benchmarking
Dimension Summary
-1.4
-1.2
-1
-0.8
-0.6
-0.4
-0.2
0
0.2
0.4
KNL Superiority Mean 0.1 -0.89 -0.74 -0.46
DCMT Superiority Mean 0.17 -0.6 -0.29 -0.21
MIRC Superiority Mean 0.03 -0.53 -0.57 -0.32
Silsoe Superiority Mean -0.06 -1.29 -0.68 -0.66
Affect of Service Information Control Library as Place Overall
External Benchmarking
External Benchmarking
Peer-to-Peer Benchmarking
Dimension Summary
4.00
4.50
5.00
5.50
6.00
6.50
7.00
7.50
8.00
8.50
Affect ofService
Affect ofService
InformationControl
InformationControl
Library asPlace
Library asPlace
Overall Overall
DCMT Library 2 DCMT Library 2 DCMT Library 2 DCMT Library 2
Utilising the data - results
• Reports– To senior management– To Library User committees– Quality department– Academic departments– Supporting departments (Computing)– For annual report– Newsletters– Inspectorate
Utilising the data - results
• Presentations– Library staff– Senior management
• Web pages• Displayed on notice boards• Focus groups created to tackle specific
issues raised by survey findings
Utilising the data - free text comments
• Communicated to Library staff• Notice boards• Web pages• Reports to management and
committees
Making the most out of your data
• Further data analysis is necessary to maximise the potential of your results
• Initial results will provide an overview of your service
• Detailed analysis allows further issues to be highlighted
Find Benchmarking Partners
Accessing other institutions’ results
• You can access all 2007 participants PDF reports from the Results section of Web site
• All SCONUL participants agree to share their results with each other across all years, contact Selena for access
• Contact each other and work together to share your electronic data files (SPSS or Excel) to allow further detailed benchmarking
LibQUAL+ Analysis Service
• The possibilities for additional analysis are endless, your time may not be
• LibQUAL+ analysis service provides customised reports produced to your requirements
• Discounted pricing due to unique relationship with the ARL
• Contact Selena for details, [email protected]
Acknowledgements
• Selena Lock, R&D Officer, Cranfield University
• All SCONUL and ARL LibQUAL+ Participants
J. Stephen Town
Director of Knowledge ServicesDefence College of Management and
Technology
Deputy University LibrarianCranfield University
