user perceptions of library effectiveness in malaysian agricultural libraries

Library ReviewUser perceptions of library effectiveness in Malaysian agricultural librariesShaheen MajidMumtaz Ali AnwarTamara S. Eisenschitz

Article information:To cite this document:Shaheen MajidMumtaz Ali AnwarTamara S. Eisenschitz, (2001),"User perceptions of library effectiveness in Malaysianagricultural libraries", Library Review, Vol. 50 Iss 4 pp. 176 - 186Permanent link to this document:http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/00242530110390451

Downloaded on: 12 November 2014, At: 00:24 (PT)References: this document contains references to 25 other documents.To copy this document: [email protected] fulltext of this document has been downloaded 2688 times since 2006*

Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:Adnan Ali Adikata, Mumtaz A. Anwar, (2006),"Student library use: a study of faculty perceptions in a Malaysian university",Library Review, Vol. 55 Iss 2 pp. 106-119Muhammad Ramzan, Diljit Singh, (2009),"Status of information technology applications in Pakistani libraries", The ElectronicLibrary, Vol. 27 Iss 4 pp. 573-587Jurgita Rudžionien#, Jaroslav Dvorak, (2014),"Public administration approach: What do libraries need for consistentinformation services evaluation", Library Management, Vol. 35 Iss 6/7 pp. 495-507 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/LM-02-2014-0019

Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by 194764 []

For AuthorsIf you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors serviceinformation about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Pleasevisit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.

About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.comEmerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio ofmore than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of onlineproducts and additional customer resources and services.

Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on PublicationEthics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation.

*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

Dow

nloa

ded

by T

echn

isch

e U

nive

rsita

t Mun

chen

At 0

0:24

12

Nov

embe

r 20

14 (

PT)

http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/00242530110390451

User perceptions oflibrary effectiveness inMalaysian agriculturallibraries

Shaheen Majid

Mumtaz Ali Anwar and

Tamara S. Eisenschitz

Introduction

A library is considered as an important and

integral component of any high quality

research institution. Agricultural research is

no exception to this. Sustained growth in

agriculture cannot be achieved without

improving access to the needed information

which will strengthen agricultural research

(Gooch, 1994). As well-equipped laboratories

and field facilities are indispensable for

carrying out agricultural research, well-

developed libraries are essential to provide

information support to researchers

(Wasserman, 1991). Lack of current,

accurate, and relevant information could

seriously hinder the agricultural research

process, leading to low quality or duplicate

research resulting in wastage of financial,

material and human resources (Perera, 1995).

Emphasizing the need for library evaluation

studies, Nicholas (1996, p. 5) argued, `̀ recent

political and economic events have dragged

libraries into the value-driven environment,

from which they are unlikely ever to escape''.

Libraries are now on the same cost-conscious

footing as any other business and, as a result,

they are subject to the same concerns, such as

customer care, customer character, economic

efficiency, cost benefit, etc. (Greenaway,

1997). Library assessment helps understand

what is working well or poorly and what are its

current strengths and weaknesses (Crist et al.,

1994). User assessment can provide

invaluable data to libraries in re-orienting

their collections, services and activities for

effectively meeting their information needs

(Fidzani, 1998; Eager and Oppenheim,

1996).

Cullen and Calvert (1996, p. 115) pointed

out, `̀ there might well be some core

dimensions of effectiveness that can be used

for judging effectiveness, and as a basis for

performance measurement''. Although user

satisfaction is considered as a reliable criterion

for determining library effectiveness (Thong

and Yap, 1996), some other factors such as

size, relevance and currency of collections,

appropriateness and efficiency of library

services, adequacy of library facilities, staff

attitude and performance, etc. can also be

used for measuring the effectiveness of a

library. It is obvious that, in most situations,

the final success of a library in meeting the

information needs of its users would depend

on the optimal performance of all these

The authors

Shaheen Majid is Assistant Professor at the Division ofInformation Studies, Nanyang Technological University,Singapore, and is enrolled for doctoral studies with CityUniversity, London, UK. E-mail: [email protected] Ali Anwar is Professor at the College ofGraduate Studies, Library and Information Science Program,Kuwait University. E-mail: [email protected] S. Eisenschitz is is a Lecturer at the Departmentof Information Science, City University, London, UK.E-mail: [email protected]

Keywords

User studies, Agriculture, Malaysia, Customer satisfaction,Library users, Research organizations

Abstract

This study investigated those factors that contributepositively in shaping users' perceptions of libraryeffectiveness. A questionnaire-based survey of five majoragricultural libraries in Malaysia was conducted. It wasfound that the adequacy of collections, services and facilitieswere closely linked to the perceptions of libraryeffectiveness. Certain other factors contributing positively tothe perception of library effectiveness were the adequacyand effectiveness of library promotion, involvement of usersin the selection of library materials, convenient librarylocation, participation in user education programmes,availability of assistance for using library resources andfacilities, and subject background of library professionals.The paper suggests that for any reliable library effectivenessstudy, all factors associated with user satisfaction should beinvestigated together.

Electronic access

The research register for this journal is available at

http://www.mcbup.com/research_registers

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is

available at

http://www.emerald-library.com/ft

176

Library Review

Volume 50 . Number 4 . 2001 . pp. 176±186

# MCB University Press . ISSN 0024-2535

Dow

nloa

ded

by T

echn

isch

e U

nive

rsita

t Mun

chen

At 0

0:24

12

Nov

embe

r 20

14 (

PT)

factors (Bell, 1986). That is why these factors

should not be used in isolation for measuring

library effectiveness. Rather, the full range of

resources, services and activities should be

studied together.

Nicholas (1996) felt that the traditional

measures of library evaluation such as the

number of books and serials on the shelves or

titles bought per year, etc. were no longer

valid. He argued that the yardstick had to be

changed since the success or effectiveness of a

library can be measured only through user

satisfaction. Continuous interaction between

scientists and information workers is essential

for developing a better understanding of their

information needs, acceptance and use of

library collections, services and facilities, their

opinion about the utility of various

information sources, etc. Such feedback is

necessary for conceptualisation, planning,

and implementation of information systems

and services (Verhoeven et al., 1995).

Adequacy of collections is one of the

important factors that determines the

effectiveness of any library in meeting the

information needs of its users. In fact, a

majority of the information services offered by

libraries are collection-based. Periodic

collection assessment is necessary to

determine to what extent library collections

are relevant, current and adequate in meeting

the information needs of users (Osburn,

1992). One problem common among libraries

in most developing countries is their

inadequate, outdated and irrelevant

collections. Womboh (1993) evaluated the

library collections of the University of

Agriculture, Makurdi, Nigeria and discovered

that 95 per cent of the surveyed faculty felt

that the existing library resources were

inadequate to effectively support new

academic programs. Mwila (1993) found that

over 75 per cent of the academics from the

University of Zambia were visiting their

library less frequently due to the inadequacy

of library materials. Nkereuwem (1984) noted

that about 84 per cent of the Nigerian

scientists and engineers visited their library

only a few times a year mainly due to

inadequate library collections.

Several studies have pointed out the

strengths and weaknesses of various collection

assessment techniques. The use-centred

studies concentrated on the use of collections

and how well they met users' needs (Dobson

et al., 1996; Carrigan, 1996). One problem

with some use-centred techniques is that they

may not necessarily reveal the adequacy of

collections as they mainly focus on use

patterns. These approaches may not point out

inadequacy and under-selection of

collections. Osburn (1992) observed that the

concept of collection assessment was steadily

shifting from a collection-centred to a client-

centred interpretation.

Human resources are the most important

ingredient in conceptualising, planning,

designing, implementing and managing

information systems and services (Ming,

1996). Adequately trained and motivated

library staff play a crucial role in meeting the

information needs of library users (Adedibu

and Adio, 1997; Hobohm, 1996). A study by

Fidzani (1998) revealed that users needed

guidance from the library staff for effectively

using library resources, services and facilities.

Mannan and Bose (1998) reported a

relationship between the level of users'

satisfaction and their library use and

assistance sought from library staff. The study

found that a majority of the `̀ satisfied'' library

users frequently sought assistance from

librarians for obtaining the needed materials.

Regular interaction between scientists and

information professionals is essential for

effectively meeting their information needs.

Beside information handling skills, subject

knowledge could be an asset for agricultural

librarians to effectively communicate and

meet the information needs of agricultural

scientists (Majid, 1996). Folster (1995)

reported that in those institutions where staff

with subject expertise perform reference

duties, it was more likely that users' needs

would be effectively met.

It is evident from the above discussion that

a user-oriented approach was considered

more suitable for measuring library

effectiveness. It was also noted that for a more

reliable library assessment, the full range of

resources, services and activities should be

examined together. No study was found

measuring the effectiveness of agricultural

libraries in Malaysia. Available literature is

descriptive in nature, presenting personal

views and perceptions on this topic. There

was a need to study how effective were

Malaysian agricultural libraries in meeting the

information needs of their users. It is expected

that findings of this study will be useful for

these libraries in re-orienting their resources,

services and facilities to synchronise them

177

User perceptions of library effectiveness

Shaheen Majid, Mumtaz Ali Anwar and Tamara S. Eisenschitz

Library Review

Volume 50 . Number 4 . 2001 . 176±186

Dow

nloa

ded

by T

echn

isch

e U

nive

rsita

t Mun

chen

At 0

0:24

12

Nov

embe

r 20

14 (

PT)

with the information needs of their scientists.

The study may also contribute to the existing

body of knowledge on user satisfaction and

library effectiveness.

Method

The study used a questionnaire-based survey

design for data collection. This technique was

chosen as it was less time-consuming and was

economical for a scattered population.

Another reason for using a questionnaire was

the convenience of contacting the agricultural

scientists, some of whom often go out for a

considerable period of time for field

experiments. Several studies on related topics

were consulted and their instruments were

critically examined. Materials from these

instruments and the personal knowledge of

the authors were used to develop a

questionnaire for the study. The

questionnaire was pre-tested on eight

University Putra Malaysia academics and five

Malaysian Agricultural Research and

Development Institute scientists, not

included in the randomly drawn sample, to

ensure reliability and effectiveness of the

instrument.

Five major Malaysian agricultural

institutions, that is, the Malaysian

Agricultural Research and Development

Institute (MARDI), Palm Oil Research

Institute of Malaysia (PORIM), Rubber

Research Institute of Malaysia (RRIM),

Forest Research Institute of Malaysia (FRIM)

and the University Putra Malaysia (UPM)

participated in the study. These institutions

are considered the most reputable and well-

established among science and technology

organizations in Malaysia. Only agriculture-

related departments of UPM were included in

the study.

Agricultural scientists and academics, with

at least a bachelor's degree in science, or an

equivalent qualification, were included in the

population frame. Various sources such as

computerized library membership lists, latest

institutional telephone directories, and the

UPM academic calendar were used for

identifying the study population, which

comprised 1,328 scientists. Proportionate

stratified random sampling technique was

used to generate a random sample. Each

institution participating in the study

constituted a stratum. Using a random

number table, a sample size of 25 per cent was

drawn from each stratum.

A total of 332 questionnaires were

distributed and 236 filled-in questionnaires

were received back. The overall response rate

for the survey was 71.1 per cent, which is

considered satisfactory for this type of survey

(Bright, 1991). An institutional breakdown of

respondents is given in Table I. Two

questionnaires, one each from UPM and

MARDI, were not usable and thus excluded

from the data analysis. Therefore, the data for

234 (70.5 per cent) respondents will be

presented in the analysis.

Follow-up interviews were conducted with

60 respondents who consented to the

interview request made at the end of the

questionnaire. The purpose of these

interviews was to seek clarifications for certain

trends emerging as a result of data analysis.

Another objective was to seek the opinion of

respondents on other pertinent aspects not

fully covered in the questionnaire.

Results and discussion

Demographic characteristics of

respondents

Of the 233 respondents who provided

information on their academic qualifications,

103 (44.2 per cent) held a PhD degree; 98

(42.1 per cent) had an MSc or MPhil and 32

(13.7 per cent) held a BSc degree. Altogether

86.3 per cent of the respondents possessed a

postgraduate qualification. Of the

respondents, 170 (73.3 per cent) acquired

their highest academic qualification from

overseas and the remaining 62 (26.7 per cent)

from the Malaysian academic institutions.

Two respondents did not provide information

about the place of getting their highest

academic qualification. The majority of the

respondents had substantial work experience.

Over 67 per cent of them had more than ten

years' work experience as compared to 13.4

per cent who had a working experience of five

years or less. A total of 166 (70.9 per cent)

respondents were male and 68 (29.1 per cent)

were female.

Sixty respondents (consisting of eight

professors, 20 associate professors, and 32

lecturers) came from UPM. One respondent

from UPM did not provide information on

his/her job title. Of the 174 individuals

affiliated with the four agricultural research

178



Library Review

Volume 50 . Number 4 . 2001 . 176±186

Dow

nloa

ded

by T

echn

isch

e U

nive

rsita

t Mun

chen

At 0

0:24

12

Nov

embe

r 20

14 (

PT)

institutions, the distribution was: 13 (5.6 per

cent) heads of division; five (2.1 per cent)

principal research officers; 22 (9.4 per cent)

senior research officers; and 134 (57.3 per

cent) research officers.

Factors contributing to perception of

library effectiveness

This study investigated several possible

factors which were considered important in

determining the effectiveness of libraries

participating in this survey.

Respondents' ability to keep in touch

with scientific literature and perception

of library effectiveness

It is very important for researchers to keep

themselves up to date with current

developments in their areas of interest. They

quite naturally expect, to a large extent, their

institutional library to provide resources and

services for meeting their information needs.

Respondents were asked if they were able to

keep in touch, as much as they would like to,

with information produced in their specific

areas of interest. It was found that of the 230

respondents, 131 (57 per cent) felt that they

were able to keep in touch with literature

while 99 (43 per cent) respondents felt

otherwise. Of the 131 respondents who were

able to keep in touch with current literature,

71 (54.2 per cent) perceived their library as

`̀ effective'' or `̀ very effective'' in meeting their

information needs and 51 (38.9 per cent)

participants evaluated their library as

`̀ somewhat effective'' (Table II). Only 6.9 per

cent of the respondents who were keeping in

touch with scientific literature assessed their

library as `̀ ineffective'' or `̀ very ineffective''.

Of the 99 respondents who expressed their

inability to keep in touch with current

literature, only 23 (23.2 per cent) perceived

their library as `̀ effective'' or `̀ very effective''

in meeting their information needs as

compared to 33 (33.3 per cent) respondents

who felt that their library was `̀ ineffective'' or

`̀ very ineffective''. The Chi-square test

showed high significant differences between

both categories of respondents for their

perception of library effectiveness. It appears

that scientists keeping in touch with current

literature are more likely to perceive their

library as effective in meeting their

information needs.

Adequacy of library collections and

perception of library effectiveness

Respondents were asked to provide their

assessment of the adequacy of their library

collections. These responses were cross-

tabulated with their perception of library

effectiveness in meeting their information

needs. A positive relationship was found

between the assessment of participants of the

adequacy of various library materials and their

perception of library effectiveness. Those

respondents who gave the highest assessment

(mean score = 3.77) to their book collections

considered their library as `̀ very effective'' in

meeting their information needs (Table III).

Perception of library effectiveness declined

with the decrease in mean scores for the

adequacy of books. The lowest mean score for

the adequacy of books (1.75) was recorded

for those respondents who considered their

library as `̀ very ineffective'' in meeting their

information needs.

Those participants who gave the highest

assessment for the adequacy of serials (mean

score = 4.23) perceived their library as `̀ very

effective'' in meeting their information needs.

The perception of library effectiveness

decreased steadily with the decrease in mean

scores for the adequacy of serials. Those

participants who gave the lowest assessment

(mean of 2.00) to their serials collections

considered their library as `̀ very ineffective''.

Almost the same trend was observed for

Table I Questionnaire distribution and response rate

Number of questionnaires Response

Institution Distributed Returned rate (%)

University Putra Malaysia (UPM) 92 61 66.3

Malaysian Agricultural Research and Development Institute

(MARDI) 118 88 74.6

Palm Oil Research Institute of Malaysia (PORIM) 33 24 72.7

Rubber Research Institute of Malaysia (RRIM) 48 33 68.8

Forest Research Institute of Malaysia (FRIM) 41 30 73.2

Total 332 236 71.1

179



Library Review

Volume 50 . Number 4 . 2001 . 176±186

Dow

nloa

ded

by T

echn

isch

e U

nive

rsita

t Mun

chen

At 0

0:24

12

Nov

embe

r 20

14 (

PT)

research reports, monographs, reference

materials, abstracting and indexing sources,

AV materials and CD-ROM products. It

seems that those users who consider their

library collections as adequate are more likely

to perceive their library as effective in meeting

their information needs.

Involvement of respondents in the

selection of library materials and


Respondents were asked if their library sought

their opinion in the selection of library

materials. Out of the 230 respondents, 143

(62.2 per cent) mentioned that they were

consulted while 87 (37.8 per cent) replied in

the negative. Of the 143 respondents who

were consulted by their library for selecting

library materials, 68 (47.5 per cent) perceived

their library as `̀ effective'' or `̀ very effective''

in meeting their information needs (Table

IV). Another 58 (40.6 per cent) of the

participants who were consulted, assessed

their library as `̀ somewhat effective''. Of the

87 respondents who were not consulted for

the selection of materials, only 17 (32.2 per

cent) perceived their library as `̀ effective'' or

`̀ very effective'' in meeting their information

needs. The Chi-square test, after data

collapsing to remove three (30 per cent) of the

cells having an expected count of less than 5,

showed high significant differences between

both categories of respondents for their

assessment about library effectiveness. It

appears that the involvement of library users

in the selection of library materials is likely to

result in developing library collections that are

more relevant to their information needs.

Such consultations could also create a feeling

of being involved leading to enhanced

perception of library effectiveness.

Adequacy of library equipment and


Assessment by respondents of the adequacy

of library equipment was cross-tabulated with

their perception of library effectiveness. It was

found that those respondents who gave the

highest assessment for the adequacy of OPAC

terminals (mean score = 4.00) considered

their library as `̀ very effective''. Perception of

Table II Ability to keep in touch with literature and perception of library

effectiveness

Library effectiveness Keeping in touch Not keeping in touch

Very effective 13 (9.9) ±

Effective 58 (44.3) 23 (23.2)

Somewhat effective 51 (38.9) 43 (43.4)

Ineffective 8 (6.1) 29 (29.3)

Very ineffective 1 (0.8) 4 (4.0)

Total 131 (100.0) 99 (100.0)

(57.0) (43.0)

Notes: Chi-square = 38.823; df = 4; p < 0.001; N = 230; Figures inparentheses are percentages

Table III Adequacy of library collections and perception of library effectiveness

Library effectiveness ± mean score (std deviation)

5 4 3 2 1

Type of material N Very effective Effective

Somewhat

effective Ineffective

Very

ineffective

Books 229 3.77 (1.24) 3.50 (0.81) 2.93 (0.92) 2.39 (0.92) 1.75 (1.50)

Serials 231 4.23 (1.24) 3.85 (0.75) 3.27 (0.98) 2.59 (0.85) 2.00 (1.50)

Research reports/

monographs, etc. 225 3.92 (1.19) 3.53 (0.70) 3.22 (0.87) 2.49 (0.68) 2.00 (0.82)

Reference materials 223 3.83 (1.27) 3.49 (0.73) 3.10 (0.80) 2.65 (0.82) 2.00 (1.15)

Abstracts and indexes 223 4.00 (1,21) 3.68 (0.73) 3.37 (0.86) 2.84 (0.97) 2.00 (0.81)

Audio-visual materials 186 3.31 (1.25) 2.95 (0.93) 2.55 (0.83) 2.06 (0.77) 1.50 (0.58)

CD=ROM databases 195 4.00 (1.22) 3.38 (0.91) 2.97 (1.06) 2.71 (1.10) 2.75 (1.26)

Notes: Scale: 1 = very inadequate; 2 = inadequate; 3 = somewhat adequate; 4 = adequate; 5= very adequate;figures in parentheses are standard deviations

Table IV Involvement in the selection of library materials and perception

of library effectiveness

Library effectiveness

Involved in the

selection

Not involved in the

selection

Very effective/effective 68 (47.5) 25 (32.2)


Ineffective/very ineffective 17 (11.9) 25 (32.2)

Total 143 (100.0) 87 (100.0)

(62.2) (37.8)

Notes: Chi-square = 13.195; df = 2; p < 0.005; N = 230; Figures inparentheses are percentages

180



Library Review

Volume 50 . Number 4 . 2001 . 176±186

Dow

nloa

ded

by T

echn

isch

e U

nive

rsita

t Mun

chen

At 0

0:24

12

Nov

embe

r 20

14 (

PT)

library effectiveness declined steadily with the

decrease in mean scores for the adequacy of

OPAC terminals (Table V). Almost the same

trend was observed for other library

equipment, where participants providing

better assessment for various equipment

perceived their library to be `̀ effective'' or

`̀ very effective''. On the contrary, those

respondents who gave low assessment to the

adequacy of various library equipment

considered their library as `̀ ineffective'' or

`̀ very ineffective''. It appears that the

availability of appropriate type of library

equipment in adequate numbers contributes

in shaping the opinion of users about the

effectiveness of their library.

Adequacy of library physical facilities

and perception of library effectiveness

A positive relationship was found between the

assessment by respondents of the adequacy of

library physical facilities and perception of

library effectiveness. Those respondents who

gave higher assessment for the adequacy of

almost all physical facilities considered their

library as `̀ effective'' or `̀ very effective''

(Table VI). On the contrary, those

participants who rated various physical

facilities as inadequate perceived their library

as `̀ ineffective'' or `̀ very ineffective''. It

appears that users satisfied with library

physical facilities are more likely to perceive

their library as effective.

Library use skills of respondents and


Table VII shows the relationship between

library use skills of respondents and their

perception of library effectiveness. It was

found that of the 65 respondents with `̀ very

good'' or `̀ excellent'' library use skills, 33

(50.8 per cent) perceived their library as

`̀ effective'' or `̀ very effective'' in meeting their

information needs, whereas 40.4 per cent of

the participants with `̀ fair'' or `̀ poor'' library

use skills considered their library as

`̀ effective'' or `̀ very effective''. However the

Chi-square test, after data collapsing for both

the variables to remove over 15 (60 per cent)

of the cells with an expected count of less than

5, showed no relationship between library use

skills of the respondents and their perception

of library effectiveness.

Participation in user education

programmes and perception of library

effectiveness

It was found that nearly 60 per cent of the

respondents who had participated in user

education programmes considered their

library as `̀ effective'' or `̀ very effective'' in

meeting their information needs (Table VIII).

On the contrary, only 38.2 per cent of the

respondents who did not attend any user

education programme assessed their library as

`̀ effective'' or `̀ very effective''. The Chi-

square test, after data collapsing to remove

four (40 per cent) of the cells having an

expected count of less than 5, showed

significant differences between both

categories of respondents for their assessment

of library effectiveness.

It appeared that participation in user

education programmes might have

contributed in enhancing the perception of

respondents of their library effectiveness.

After such training, these respondents might

have started using library collections and

facilities more effectively resulting in their

enhanced satisfaction.

Table V Adequacy of library equipment and perception of library effectiveness


5 4 3 2 1

IT-based library

equipment N

Very

effective Effective

Somewhat


Very

ineffective

OPAC terminals 117 4.00 (0.82) 3.45 (0.87) 2.60 (1.05) 2.07 (0.88) 2.00 (0.60)

CD-ROM workstations 176 3.75 (1.06) 3.25 (1.03) 2.79 (1.08) 2.26 (0.90) 2.00 (0.71)

Printers 160 3.09 (1.04) 2.84 (1.03) 2.66 (1.06) 2.27 (0.92) 1.80 (0.84)

Microform reader-printers 118 3.38 (0.74) 3.23 (1.03) 2.67 (1.04) 2.19 (0.83) 1.50 (0.71)

AV equipment 141 3.38 (0.92) 3.12 (1.04) 2.55 (1.01) 1.87 (0.69) 1.50 (0.72)


181



Library Review

Volume 50 . Number 4 . 2001 . 176±186

Dow

nloa

ded

by T

echn

isch

e U

nive

rsita

t Mun

chen

At 0

0:24

12

Nov

embe

r 20

14 (

PT)

Frequency of library visits and


The relationship between frequency of

library visits and respondents' perception of

the effectiveness of their library is presented

in Table IX. Those respondents who visited

their library more frequently gave slightly

better assessment to their library in meeting

their information needs. However the Chi-


20 (66.7 per cent) of the cells having an

expected count of less than 5, showed no

significant effect of library visits on the

perception of respondents of their library

effectiveness.

Location of the library and perception of


Respondents were asked if the location of

their library was convenient for them for

visiting and using library collections, services

and facilities. A total of 193 (82.8 per cent)

respondents considered their library location

as convenient and 40 (17.2 per cent) as

inconvenient. It was found that of the 193

respondents considering the location of their

library as convenient, 86 (44.6 per cent)

perceived their library as `̀ effective'' or `̀ very

effective'' (Table X). On the contrary, only 20

per cent of the respondents considering

Table VII Library use skils of respondents and perception of library

effectiveness

Library use skills


Excellent/

very good Good Fair/poor

Very effective/effective 33 (50.8) 42 (35.3) 19 (40.4)

Somewhat effective 21 (32.3) 54 (45.4) 18 (38.3)

Ineffective/very ineffective 11 (16.9) 23 (19.3) 10 (21.3)

Total 65 (100.0) 119 (100.0) 47 (100.0)

Notes: Chi=square = 4.597; df = 4; p > 0.05; N = 231; figures inparentheses are percentages

Table VIII Participation in user education programmes and perception of


Library effectiveness Training attended

Training not

attended




Total 27 (100.0) 204 (100.0)

(11.7) (88.3)

Notes: Chi-square = 6.448; df = 2; p < 0.05; N = 231; figures inparentheses are percentages

Table IX Frequency of library visits and perception of library effectiveness

Frequency of library visits


Once or

twice a week

Once or

twice a

month

Several times

a year




Total 102 (100.0) 79 (100.0) 42 (100.0)

Notes: Chi=square = 2.657; df = 4; p > 0.05; N = 233; figures inparentheses are percentages

Table VI Adequacy of library physical facilities and perception of library effectiveness

Library efffectiveness ± mean score (std deviation)

5 4 3 2 1

Physical facilities N

Very

effective Effective

Somewhat


Very

ineffective

Library seating 227 4.15 (1.14) 3.90 (0.86) 3.51 (1.05) 3.27 (1.07) 3.00 (1.87)

Book shelves 229 3.92 (1.04) 3.84 (0.66) 3.35 (0.94) 3.03 (1.03) 2.60 (1.82)

Study carrels 199 3.82 (1.25) 3.62 (0.81) 3.18 (1.10) 3.16 (0.95) 2.75 (1.71)

Individual study rooms 152 2.67 (1.32) 3.14 (0.95) 2.47 (1.10) 2.38 (1.28) 2.67 (1.53)

Group discussion rooms 153 3.10 (0.99) 2.85 (0.84) 2.25 (1.04) 2.05 (1.05) 2.00 (1.41)

AV viewing rooms 146 3.18 (0.98) 2.90 (0.92) 2.42 (1.05) 1.93 (0.92 ±

Leisure reading lounge 205 3.92 (0.90) 3.42 (0.94) 3.06 (1.00) 2.86 (1.16) 2.25 (0.96)

Library display area 221 3.92 (0.79) 3.65 (0.79) 3.15 (1.05) 2.74 (0.90) 1.50 (1.00)

Furniture and fixtures 227 3.92 (0.95) 3.51 (0.74) 3.13 (0.90) 2.91 (0.89) 2.00 (1.00)

Lighting 230 4.46 (1.20) 3.76 (0.82 3.44 (0.87) 3.46 (0.96) 2.60 (1.52)

Air-conditioning 231 4.38 (1.19) 3.93 (0.74) 3.86 (0.83) 3.95 (0.66) 3.60 (1.67)

Library open space 220 4.08 (1.08) 3.49 (0.91) 3.02 (1.01) 3.12 (0.86) 2.40 (1.67)


182



Library Review

Volume 50 . Number 4 . 2001 . 176±186

Dow

nloa

ded

by T

echn

isch

e U

nive

rsita

t Mun

chen

At 0

0:24

12

Nov

embe

r 20

14 (

PT)

location of their library as inconvenient gave

the same assessment to their library. The Chi-


three (30 per cent) of the cells having an

expected count of less than 5, showed high

significant differences between both

categories of respondents for their perception

of library effectiveness. It appears that a

conveniently located library is likely to

encourage its users to visit it more frequently,

resulting in a better perception of library

effectiveness.

Notification of new acquisitions and


Respondents were asked if their library

notified them of the arrival of new materials

in their subject areas. On the whole, a split

response was received and about 50 per cent

of the respondents reported that they were

getting such notifications. A positive

relationship was found between the fresh

arrival notifications received by the

participants and their perception of library

effectiveness. Of the 117 respondents who

received such notifications, 70 (59.8 per

cent) considered their library as `̀ effective''

or `̀ very effective'' in meeting their

information needs (Table XI). Another

one-third of the respondents in this category

assessed their library as `̀ somewhat

effective''.

On the contrary, of the 116 participants

who did not receive notifications about new

library materials, only 23 (19.9 per cent)

considered their library as `̀ effective'' or `̀ very

effective''. A total of 36 (31.0 per cent) such

respondents rated their library as `̀ ineffective''

or `̀ very ineffective''. The Chi-square test,

after data collapsing to remove three (30 per

cent) of the cells having an expected count of

less than 5, showed high significant

differences between both categories of

participants for their assessment of library

effectiveness. It appears that those users who

receive notification of new materials are more

likely to perceive their library as effective in

meeting their information needs.

Adequacy of promotional activities and


The opinion of respondents was sought

about the adequacy of promotional activities

undertaken by their library for introducing

and publicizing library materials, services

and facilities. A split response was received

where 48.5 per cent of the respondents felt

that their library was adequately promoting

information resources, services and facilities,

while the remaining 51.5 per cent disagreed

with it.

Assessment of respondents of the

adequacy of library promotional activities

was cross-tabulated with their perception of

library effectiveness. A positive relationship

was found between the adequacy of

promotional activities and perception of

library effectiveness. Of the 111 respondents

who considered library promotional

activities as `̀ adequate'', 73 (65.8 per cent)

perceived their library as `̀ effective'' or

`̀ very effective'' in meeting their information

needs (Table XII). Only three (2.7 per cent)

respondents in this category considered

their library as `̀ ineffective'' or `̀ very

ineffective''.

On the contrary, of the 118 respondents

who considered the promotional activities of

their library as `̀ inadequate'', only 19 (16.1

per cent) considered their library as

`̀ effective'' or `̀ very effective'' while 41 (34.7

per cent) respondents perceived their library

as `̀ ineffective'' or `̀ very ineffective''. The

Chi-square test, after data collapsing to

remove three (30 per cent) of the cells having

Table X Library effectiveness and location of library

Library location

Library effectiveness Convenient Inconvenient




Total 193 (100.0) 40 (100.0)

(82.8) (17.2)

Notes: Chi=square = 12.286; df = 2; p < 0.001; N = 233; figures inparentheses are percentages

Table XI Notification about newly arrived materials and assessment of



Notifications

received

Notifications not

received




Total 117 (100.0) 116 (100.0)

(50.2) (49.8)

Notes: Chi-square = 44.942; df = 2; p < 0.001; N = 233; figures inparentheses are percentages

183



Library Review

Volume 50 . Number 4 . 2001 . 176±186

Dow

nloa

ded

by T

echn

isch

e U

nive

rsita

t Mun

chen

At 0

0:24

12

Nov

embe

r 20

14 (

PT)

an expected count of less than 5, also

demonstrated high significant differences

between both categories of respondents for

their perception of library effectiveness. It

appears that those patrons who get adequate

information about library resources, services

and facilities are more likely to perceive their

library as effective in meeting their

information needs.

Relationship between the availability of

needed materials and perception of


Table XIII presents the relationship between

the availability of library materials and the

perception of respondents of the effectiveness

of the library in meeting their information

needs. Out of the 76 respondents who were

`̀ always'' or `̀ frequently'' getting the needed

materials, 50 (65.8 per cent) perceived their

library as `̀ effective'' or `̀ very effective'' in

meeting their information needs. Perception

of library effectiveness declined with the

decrease in the availability of needed

materials. A majority of the respondents who

were getting the required materials

infrequently perceived their library as

`̀ ineffective'' or `̀ very ineffective''. The Chi-

square test, after data collapsing to remove 14

(56 per cent) of the cells having an expected

count of less than 5, also showed a positive

relationship between the availability of

needed materials and the perception of library

effectiveness.

Relationship between type of assistance

sought and perception of library

effectiveness

Respondents were asked to indicate how

frequently they sought assistance from library

staff for using library collections, services and

facilities. It was found that those participants

who often sought help from the library staff in

finding the needed materials perceived their

library as `̀ very effective'' in meeting their

information needs (Table XIV). Almost the

same trend was observed for other categories

of assistance where those respondents who

sought assistance from library staff gave better

assessment to their library. It appears that the

availability of assistance from library staff for

various purposes is likely to enhance the

image of the library for effectively meeting the

information needs of its users.

Relationship between communication

problems and perception of library

effectiveness

Respondents were asked if they encountered

any problems in explaining their information

needs to those library staff who lacked subject

background. It was found that over 85 per cent

of the respondents who did not face any

communication problems perceived their

library either as `̀ effective'' or `̀ very effective''

(Table XV). On the contrary, 40 per cent of

the respondents who faced difficulties in

explaining their information needs to non-

subject specialist librarians perceived their

library as `̀ ineffective'' or `̀ very ineffective''.

The Chi-square test, after data collapsing to

remove three (30 per cent) of the cells having

an expected count of less than 5, showed high

significant differences between both categories

of respondents for communication problems

faced by them. It appears that the availability

of subject specialists in agricultural libraries is

likely to improve communication with

scientists, thus enhancing the chances to

effectively meet their information needs.

Conclusions

Some earlier studies have suggested that

several factors need to be studied to measure

Table XII Adequacy of promotional activities and respondents'

assessment of library effectiveness


Adequate

promotion

Inadequate

promotion




Total 111 (100.0) 118 (100.0)

(48.5) (51.5)

Notes: Chi-square = 70.053; df = 2; p > 0.001; N = 229; figures inparentheses are percentages

Table XIII Availability of needed materials and the assessment of library

effectiveness

Availability of materials


Always/

frequently

Most of the

time

Occasionally/

hardly ever




Total 76 (100.0) 66 (100.0) 90 (100.0)

Notes: Chi-square = 76.433; df = 4; p < 0.001, N = 232; figures inparentheses are percentages

184



Library Review

Volume 50 . Number 4 . 2001 . 176±186

Dow

nloa

ded

by T

echn

isch

e U

nive

rsita

t Mun

chen

At 0

0:24

12

Nov

embe

r 20

14 (

PT)

library effectiveness. This study investigated

users' perception of library effectiveness with

regard to a wide range of factors covering

resources, services, and activities. It was

found that libraries with adequate collections,

equipment and physical facilities were

considered more effective. Those respondents

who kept in touch with scientific literature

gave a better assessment to their library.

Libraries involving respondents in the

selection of library materials received a better

assessment for effectively meeting the

information needs of their users. Respondents

receiving notification of new library materials

considered their library as effective. Similarly,

respondents getting information on library

services and facilities perceived their library as

more effective. A relationship was also found

between perception of library effectiveness

and availability of materials, assistance sought

in using library services and facilities, and

communication problems with non-subject

specialist library staff. Those respondents who

had participated in user education

programmes gave slightly better assessments

to their library. No relationship was found

between frequency of library visits and library

use skills of the respondents with their

perception of library effectiveness.

Conveniently located libraries were

considered more effective in meeting the

information needs of their users.

Information needs and expectations of

library users are continuously changing in the

rapidly changing information scenario.

Libraries need to re-orient their collections,

services and facilities to keep pace with these

advancements. A shift to a user-oriented

approach is quite evident from the recent

library evaluation studies. User feedback is

considered as a more reliable factor in

measuring the utility and effectiveness of any

library. The factors that influence the

perception of library effectiveness are closely

linked and interdependent, and, therefore,

should not be studied in isolation.

Investigating one or a few selected factors may

lead to misleading results. It will be more

appropriate to study all the related factors

simultaneously so as to reach more reliable

and dependable conclusions. Therefore, in

order to improve user satisfaction and their

overall perception of library effectiveness,

libraries should make concerted efforts to

consider all possible factors associated with

user satisfaction. Concentrating on or putting

too much emphasis on a particular type of

collection, service or facility may not lead to

improved perception of library effectiveness.

Table XIV Type of assistance sought and perception of library effectiveness


5 4 3 2 1

Very

effective Effective

Somewhat


Very

ineffective

Type of assistance sought (N = 13) (N = 79) (N = 95) (N = 35) (N = 5)

For finding documents 2.85 (1.41) 2.44 (0.93) 2.25 (0.86) 2.05 (0.80) 2.00 (0.71)

To know location of a service 2.62 (1.50) 2.24 (0.89) 2.32 (0.82) 2.05 (0.90) 1.60 (0.89)

For using CD-ROM service 2.55 (0.82) 2.59 (1.20) 2.30 (1.21) 2.45 (1.35) 1.80 (0.84)

For using OPAC 1.89 (0.93) 2.08 (0.88) 1.86 (0.89) 1.36 (0.63) 1.00 (0.00)

For using library equipment 2.91 (1.30) 2.78 (1.41) 2.75 (1.55) 2.78 (1.87) 1.40 (0.55

Notes: Scale: 1 = hardly ever; 2 = occasionally; 3 = most of the time; 4 = frequently; 5 = always; figures inparentheses are standard deviations

Table XV Communication problems and perception of library effectiveness


Communication

problem faced

No communication

problems faced Total




Notes: Chi-square = 12.982; df = 2; p < 0.005; N = 207; figures in parentheses are percentages

185



Library Review

Volume 50 . Number 4 . 2001 . 176±186

Dow

nloa

ded

by T

echn

isch

e U

nive

rsita

t Mun

chen

At 0

0:24

12

Nov

embe

r 20

14 (

PT)

References

Adedibu, L. and Adio, G. (1997), `̀ Information needs andinformation seeking patterns of medical students atLautech, Ogbomoso'', Aslib Proceedings, Vol. 49No. 9, pp. 238-42.

Bell, S. (1986), `̀ Information systems planning andoperation in less developed countries: case study,information systems, evaluation'', Journal ofInformation Science, Vol. 12 No. 6,pp. 319-31.

Bright, B.P. (1991), Introduction to Research Methods inPostgraduate Theses and Dissertations, TheUniversity of Hull, Newland.

Carrigan, D.P. (1996), `̀ Collection development-evaluation'', Journal of Academic Librarianship,Vol. 24 No. 4, pp. 273-8.

Crist, M., Daub, P. and MacAdam, B. (1994), `̀ Userstudies: reality check and future perfect'', WilsonLibrary Bulletin, Vol. 68 No. 6, pp. 38-41.

Cullen, R. and Calvert, P. (1996), `̀ New Zealand universitylibraries effectiveness project: dimensions andconcepts of organizational effectiveness'', Libraryand Information Science Research, Vol. 18 No. 2,pp. 99-119.

Dobson, C., Kushkowski, J.D. and Gerhard, K.H. (1996),`̀ Collection evaluation for interdisciplinary fields:a comprehensive approach'', Journal of AcademicLibrarianship, Vol. 22 No. 4, pp. 279-84.

Eager, C. and Oppenheim, C. (1996), `̀ An observationalmethod for undertaking user needs studies'', Journalof Librarianship and Information Science, Vol. 28No. 1, pp. 15-22.

Fidzani, B.T. (1998), `̀ Information needs and information-seeking behaviour of graduate students at theUniversity of Botswana'', Library Review, Vol. 47No. 7, pp. 329-40.

Folster, M.B. (1995), `̀ Information seeking patterns: socialsciences'', Reference Librarian, Vol. 49 No. 50,pp. 83-93.

Gooch, P. (1994), `̀ Information flows in agriculturalresearch in Vietnam: status and prospects'',IAALD Quarterly Bulletin, Vol. 39 No. 4,pp. 312-18.

Greenaway, J. (1997), `̀ Interlending and document supplyin Australia: the way forward'', Asian Libraries,Vol. 6 Nos 3/4, pp. 223-9.

Hobohm, H.C. (1996), `̀ The impact of new technology onlibraries: an introductory note'', Inspel, Vol. 30No. 4, pp. 303-7.

Majid, S. (1996), `̀ Employers' perceptions about thesubject specialist agricultural librarians indeveloping countries'', Australian Library Journal,Vol. 45 No. 3, pp. 215-24.

Mannan, S.M. and Bose, M.L. (1998), `̀ Resource sharingand information networking of libraries inBangladesh: a study on user satisfaction'',Malaysian Journal of Library & Information Science,Vol. 3 No. 2, pp. 67-86.

Ming, D.C. (1996), `̀ Assessing the impact of IT onuniversity library services in the 21st century'',Malaysian Journal of Library & Information Science,Vol. 1 No. 2, pp. 79-87.

Mwila, A.B (1993), The Use of the University of ZambiaLibrary by the Social Science, Humanities andScience Faculties, PhD dissertation, University ofMichigan, Annn Arbor, MI.

Nicholas, D. (1996), Assessing Information Needs: Toolsand Techniques, Aslib, London.

Nkereuwem, E.E. (1984), An Analysis of Information usedby Scientists and Engineers in the PetroleumIndustry of Nigeria, PhD dissertation, University ofMichigan, Annn Arbor, MI.

Osburn, C.B. (1992), `̀ Collection evaluation andacquisitions budgets: a kaleidoscope in themaking'', Journal of Library Administration, Vol. 17No. 2, pp. 3-11.

Perera, M.J.C. (1995), `̀ Development of scientificinformation services in Sri Lanka: a perspective withspecial reference to agriculture'', IAALD QuarterlyBulletin, Vol. 40 No. 4, pp. 109-13.

Thong, J.Y.L. and Yap, C.S. (1996), `̀ Information systemseffectiveness: a user satisfaction approach'',Information Processing & Management, Vol. 32No. 5, pp. 601-10.

Verhoeven, A.H., Boerman, E.J. and Jong, B.M. (1995),`̀ Use of information sources by family physicians: aliterature survey'', Bulletin of Medical LibraryAssociation, Vol. 83 No. 1, pp. 85-90.

Wasserman, P. (1991), `̀ Information transfer in scienceand technology: an overview'', Asian Libraries,Vol. 1 No. 2, pp. 27-38.

Womboh, B.S.H. (1993), `̀ Collection evaluation in Africa: acase study of a university library'', CollectionManagement, Vol. 17 No. 4, pp. 79-94.

186



Library Review

Volume 50 . Number 4 . 2001 . 176±186

Dow

nloa

ded

by T

echn

isch

e U

nive

rsita

t Mun

chen

At 0

0:24

12

Nov

embe

r 20

14 (

PT)

http://www.emeraldinsight.com/action/showLinks?crossref=10.1016%2FS0099-1333%2896%2990118-4


http://www.emeraldinsight.com/action/showLinks?crossref=10.1177%2F016555158601200614


http://www.emeraldinsight.com/action/showLinks?system=10.1108%2F00242539810233459


http://www.emeraldinsight.com/action/showLinks?crossref=10.1300%2FJ111v17n02_02




http://www.emeraldinsight.com/action/showLinks?system=10.1108%2Feb051471



http://www.emeraldinsight.com/action/showLinks?crossref=10.1016%2F0306-4573%2896%2900004-0



http://www.emeraldinsight.com/action/showLinks?system=10.1108%2F10176749710368406

http://www.emeraldinsight.com/action/showLinks?crossref=10.1080%2F00049670.1996.10755761

This article has been cited by:

1. Muhammad Ijaz Mairaj, Mirza Muhammad Naseer. 2013. Library services and user satisfaction in developing countries: acase study. Health Information & Libraries Journal 30:4, 318-326. [CrossRef]

2. Abdul Mannan Khan. 2012. Users' perceptions of library effectiveness: A comparative users' evaluation of central libraries ofAMU, BHU, ALU and BBRAU. The International Information & Library Review 44:2, 72-85. [CrossRef]

3. Charles N. Nzivo. 2012. User perception on library services and information resources in Kenyan Public Libraries. LibraryReview 61:2, 110-127. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

4. Abdul Mannan Khan, S. Mustafa Zaidi. 2011. Determinants of library's effectiveness and efficiency: A study of collectiondevelopment, organization and services of Maulana Azad Library, AMU (India). Library Collections, Acquisitions, and TechnicalServices 35:4, 95-105. [CrossRef]

5. William Mokotjo, Trywell Kalusopa. 2010. Evaluation of the Agricultural Information Service (AIS) in Lesotho. InternationalJournal of Information Management 30:4, 350-356. [CrossRef]

6. Andre P. Bolduc. 2008. Surveying user needs in an international context: A qualitative case study from the ILO, Geneva. TheInternational Information & Library Review 40:1, 1-9. [CrossRef]

7. I-Ming Wang, Chich-Jen Shieh. 2006. The relationship between service quality and customer satisfaction: the example ofCJCU library. Journal of Information and Optimization Sciences 27:1, 193-209. [CrossRef]

8. Jennifer Rowley. 2005. Making sense of the quality maze: perspectives for public and academic libraries. Library Management26:8/9, 508-518. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Dow

nloa

ded

by T

echn

isch

e U

nive

rsita

t Mun

chen

At 0

0:24

12

Nov

embe

r 20

14 (

PT)

http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/hir.12038

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.iilr.2012.04.004

http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/00242531211220744

http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/full/10.1108/00242531211220744

http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/pdfplus/10.1108/00242531211220744

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.lcats.2011.08.002

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2010.01.005

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.iilr.2007.12.002

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02522667.2006.10699686

http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/01435120510631792

http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/full/10.1108/01435120510631792

http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/pdfplus/10.1108/01435120510631792

user perceptions of library effectiveness in malaysian agricultural libraries

Documents