Upload
catherine-allison
View
223
Download
2
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
New Ways of ListeningTo Our Users:
LibQUAL+ 2004 @ Queen’s
What Is LibQUAL+ ?
Web-based tool for assessing library service quality.
A tool for identifying areas for service improvement
Developed and refined over 5 years, 200,000+ respondents, 400+ institutions
Based on ServQual. 15 years of research and application at Texas A&M, etc.
How Does LibQUAL+ Measure Quality?
Rating of services Rating of services in contextin context Based on users’ and non-users’
perceptions andand expectations Gap analysis between perceived
level of service, and minimum and desired service level
Comparison with other libraries, past years & developing norms
Why LibQUAL+?
Quick, easy and inexpensive Web based survey administered by Association of
Research Libraries (ARL); data collected & analyzed by expert LibQUAL+ staff
Allows Library to see relationship to academic libraries across North America over time
Complement other local assessments
Starting point to identify best practices in providing library service
LibQUAL+ 2004 Survey Specifics
202 institutions from North America, Europe & Australia - including 57 ARL Libraries & consortia
9 Canadian institutions: Alberta, Calgary, McGill, Montreal, Queen’s, UNB, Western, Windsor, York
113,000 respondents
LibQUAL+ Spring 2004 Survey
22 service quality survey questions 5 optional “local” questions Demographic & usage questions One open comments box
Service Quality Dimensions
Library Service Quality
Affect of Service
Empathy
Responsiveness
Assurance
Reliability
Library as Place
Utilitarian Space
Information Control
Ease of Navigation
Convenience
Scope of collections
Timeliness
Refuge
Symbol
Modern Equipment
When it comes to…
My MinimumService Level Is
low …… high
My DesiredService Level Is
low …… high
Perceived ServicePerformance Islow …… high
N/A
1 Employees who instill confidence in users
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
N/A
2 Easy-to-use access tools that allow me to find things on my own
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
N/A
3 Print and/or electronic journal collections I require for my work
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
N/A
Survey - Sample Section
Rating user expectations
Service Adequacy Gap = Perceived Score – Minimum Score
Desired level of service
or
Value
Queen’s 2004 Results
The Results are a measure of perceived service quality in relation to user expectations for that service or library facility.
Comparative results can tell us
Where we need to focus our attention to improve services.
A low score compared to other peer libraries, points to a potential area for improvement.
Comparative results told us
Users priorities and service expectations are strikingly consistent among the institutions participating in the 2004 survey.
Queen’s top 5 & bottom 5 rated questions were identical to the average ARL top & bottom 5.
Population for Queen’s Survey
Total initial sample: 5,450All full time-faculty: 850Random stratified sample of:
3,000 full-time undergraduates1000 full-time graduates600 staff
Survey Respondents
Analyses based 773 completed valid user surveys – excludes library staff. The respondent population was largely representative of the overall population distribution.
Respondent Comments
361 respondents (45%) filled in the comments box
Provides context & detail for survey scores Loaded into a database to facilitate analysis
http://db.library.queensu.ca/libqual/ Summary of general comments
+ Actions taken/planned
http://library.queensu.ca/webir/libqual/results-2004.htm
Frequency of Use
At least once a week, respondents used:
Library premises: 56% Library resources sites: 76% Google or other non-library
gateway: 90%67% use Google, etc. daily!
Undergrads use the library (63%) & its resources
(67%) with similar frequency
Overall 2004 Ratings
Queen’s exceeded ARL average1st among Canadian participants
Strengths: Library as PlaceService by library staff (Affect of Service)
Most needed improvements:Collections & access to information
(Information Control)
Library as Place
Highly rated as:
A comfortable and inviting location
Higher use = Lower rating
Most important to undergrads
Library as Place
Concerns/Challenges: Lack of seating during exams, insufficient and old computer equipment, insufficient printers, expensive copying/printing charges, need for longer hours, and for more variety of study space (quiet spaces, discussion spaces, informal spaces, etc.)
Affect of Service
Highly rated for:
Employees who deal with users in a caring fashion
More knowledgeable users rate customer service more highly (get more out of these services)
Affect of Service
Challenges to Libraries: Promote the value of instructional
services to the community
Reaching out to users who don’t/won’t come to training sessions or the reference desk
Information Control
Faculty most dissatisfied; low negative rating
Undergraduates are most satisfied; positive rating almost matches overall ARL rating.
Humanities/Social Sciences users generate low service rating across all user groups.
Information Control
System-wide Challenges: Market existing services and collections more
effectively
Easier access to library resources from the desktop; maximize existing resources
Improve electronic & print collections:
boost weak collections/reinforce strong ones
LibQUAL+ Consultation Timeline
To Date: Report and consultation plan discussed at
Management Team and AUL Forum Report and plan distributed to all staff
All-Staff information sessions, Oct. 4 & 7 /04 Units and functional teams, Oct. 12-Nov. 5 /04
Meetings of individual units and functional teams identify the issues in their areas of responsibilities and recommend appropriate actions.
AUL Forum, Nov. 8 /04 Review responses, fill in gaps & adjust overlaps and
contradictory directions
LibQUAL+ Consultation Timeline
Management Team, January – March /05 Reviewed the compilation of issues and objectives in
developing the 2005/06 Budget Report. Compiled and approved action items prepared by the functional teams and units.
Roll Out to Public
Two articles for The Gazette & The Journal 1st Summary of Results [Oct. 2004] 2nd Survey Results piece incorporating actions
planned & taken to improve services [April 2005]
Survey results published on the Library’s LibQUAL+ web site: http://library.queensu.ca/webir/libqual.htm
http://library.queensu.ca/webir/libqual.htm
Queen’s LibQUAL+ Web Site