Project URL – http://www.libqual.org/

TM

LibQUAL+™ IntroductionAuckland, NZ

April 5, 2005

Presented by:

Colleen Cook

Bruce Thompson

Total Circulation

Note. M. Kyrillidou and M. Young. (2003).ARL Statistics 2002-03. Washington, D.C.: ARL, p.8.

Reference Transactions

Note. M. Kyrillidou and M. Young. (2003).ARL Statistics 2002-03. Washington, D.C.: ARL, p.8.

Assessment

“The difficulty lies in trying to find a single model or set of simple indicators that can be used by different institutions, and that will compare something across large groups that is by definition only locally applicable—i.e., how well a library meets the needs of its institution. Librarians have either made do with oversimplified national data or have undertaken customized local evaluations of effectiveness, but there has not been

devised an effective way to link the two.”

Sarah Pritchard, Library Trends, 1996

LibQUAL+™ Goals

Improve mechanisms and protocols for evaluating libraries

Develop web-based tools for assessing library service quality

Identify best practices in providing library service Support libraries seeking to understand changes in user

behavior Assist libraries seeking to re-position library services in

the new environment

LibQUAL+™ Outcomes

Securing information that contributes meaningfully to planning and improvement efforts at a local level

Providing analytical frameworks that institutional staff can apply without extensive training or assistance

Helping decision-makers understand success of investments

Finding useful inter-institutional comparisons

Multiple Methodsof Listening to Customers Transactional surveys* Mystery shopping New, declining, and lost-customer surveys Focus group interviews Customer advisory panels Service reviews Customer complaint, comment, and inquiry capture Total market surveys* Employee field reporting Employee surveys Service operating data capture*A SERVQUAL-type instrument is most suitable for these methodsNote. A. Parasuraman. The SERVQUAL Model: Its Evolution And Current Status. (2000).

Paper presented at ARL Symposium on Measuring Service Quality, Washington, D.C.

PERCEPTIONS SERVICE

“….only customers judge quality;

all other judgments are essentially

irrelevant”

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

The LibQUAL+™ Premise

Extended GAPS ModelOrganizational Barriers to SQ Customers’ Assessment of SQ

Poor UpwardCommunication

Poor HorizontalCommunication

Poor Tech - JobFit

Perception ofInfeasibility

GAP 1

GAP 2

GAP 3

GAP 4

GAP 5

Reliability

Responsiveness

Assurance

Empathy

Tangibles

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+™ Project™ Project

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

“22 items”

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 ControlInformation Control

Provision of Physical Collections

Self-RelianceInformation Access

Access to Information

Access to Information

Survey Instrument

Rapid Growth in Other Areas Languages

American English British English French Dutch Swedish

Consortia Each may create 5 local

questions to add to their survey

Types of Institutions Academic Health Sciences Academic Law Academic Military College or University Community College European Business Hospital Public State

Countries U.S., U.K., Canada, the

Netherlands, South Africa, Sweden, France, Australia, New Zealand, Malaysia

LibQUAL+™ Participants

12

43

164

316

206 210

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Participating Libraries

World LibQUAL+™ Survey

LibQUAL+™ Resources

LibQUAL+™ Website:http://www.libqual.org

Publications: http://www.libqual.org/publications

Events and Training: http://www.libqual.org/events

Gap Theory/Radargraph Introduction: http://www.libqual.org/Information/Tools/libqualpresentation.cfm

LibQUAL+™ Procedures Manual: http://www.libqual.org/Information/Manual/index.cfm

LibQUAL+™ ContactInformation Martha Kyrillidou

Senior Program for Office of Statistics and Measurement martha@arl.org

Amy Hoseth LibQUAL+™ Communications Coordinator amyh@arl.org

Jonathan D. Sousa Technical Applications Development Manager jonathan@arl.org