Transcript Slide 1

TM
LibQUAL+ : An Overview
™
CASLIN
The Czech Republic
June, 2006
Presented by:
Bruce Thompson
http://www.coe.tamu.edu/~bthompson
Project URL – http://www.libqual.org/
Total Circulation
Total Circulation
600,000
550,000
500,000
450,000
19
91
19
92
19
93
19
94
19
95
19
96
19
97
19
98
19
99
20
00
20
01
20
02
400,000
Note. M. Kyrillidou and M. Young. (2003).
ARL Statistics 2002-03. Washington, D.C.: ARL, p.8.
Reference Transactions
Reference Transactions
170,000
160,000
150,000
140,000
130,000
120,000
110,000
100,000
19
91
19
92
19
93
19
94
19
95
19
96
19
97
19
98
19
99
20
00
20
01
20
02
90,000
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
The LibQUAL+ Premise
™
PERCEPTIONS
SERVICE
“….only customers judge quality;
all other judgments are essentially
irrelevant”
Note. Zeithaml, Parasuraman, Berry. (1999).
Delivering quality service. NY: The Free Press.
Multiple Methods
of 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 methods
Note. A. Parasuraman. The SERVQUAL Model: Its Evolution And Current Status. (2000).
Paper presented at ARL Symposium on Measuring Service Quality, Washington, D.C.
13 Libraries
English LibQUAL+™ Version
4000 Respondents
Emergent
2000
QUAL
PURPOSE
Describe library
environment;
build theory of library
service quality from
user perspective
LibQUAL+™ Project
DATA
Unstructured interviews
at 8 ARL institutions
ANALYSIS
Content analysis:
(cards & Atlas TI)
PRODUCT/RESULT
Case studies1
Valid LibQUAL+™ protocol
LibQUAL+™
QUAN Test
instrument
Web-delivered survey
Reliability/validity
analyses: Cronbachs
Alpha, factor analysis,
SEM, descriptive statistics
Scalable process
Enhanced understanding of
user-centered views of service
quality in the library
environment2
QUAL
Refine theory
of service quality
Unstructured interviews at
Health Sciences and the
Content analysis
Smithsonian libraries
Cultural perspective3
QUAL
Refine LibQUAL+™
instrument
E-mail to survey
administrators
Content analysis
Refined survey delivery
process and theory of service
quality4
QUAN
Test LibQUAL+™
instrument
Web-delivered survey
Reliability/validity analyses
including Cronbachs Alpha,
factor analysis, SEM,
descriptive statistics
Refined LibQUAL+™
instrument5
Focus groups
Content analysis
QUAL Refine theory
Iterative
2004
315 Libraries English, Dutch, Swedish,
German LibQUAL+™ Versions
160,000 anticipated respondents
Vignette
Re-tooling
Local contextual
understanding of
LibQUAL+™ survey
responses6
76 Interviews Conducted






York University
University of Arizona
Arizona State
University of Connecticut
University of Houston
University of Kansas




University of Minnesota
University of Pennsylvania
University of Washington
Smithsonian
 Northwestern Medical
Reliability
“You put a search on a book and it’s just gone; it’s not
reacquired. … There’s more of a problem of lost
books, of books that are gone and nobody knows
why and nobody’s doing anything about it.”
Faculty member
Affect of Service
“I want to be treated with respect. I want you to be
courteous, to look like you know what you are doing
and enjoy what you are doing. … Don’t get into
personal conversations when I am at the desk.”
Faculty member
Library as Place
“One of the cherished rituals is going up the steps and
through the gorgeous doors of the library and
heading up to the fifth floor to my study. … I have
my books and I have six million volumes downstairs
that are readily available to me in an open stack
library.”
Faculty member
Self-reliance
“…first of all, I would turn to the best search engines
that are out there. That’s not a person so much as
an entity. In this sense, librarians are search
engines [ just ] with a different interface.”
Faculty member
“22 items”
2000
2001
2002
2003
41-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 Control
Information
Control
Provision of
Physical
Collections
Self-Reliance
Information
Access
Access to
Information
Access to
Information
Survey Instrument
“22 Items and The Box….”
Why the Box is so Important



About 40% of participants provide open-ended
comments, and these are linked to demographics
and quantitative data.
Users elaborate the details of their concerns.
Users feel the need to be constructive in their
criticisms, and offer specific suggestions for
action.
“…and Five Ancillary Items”
Either Zero or Five Ancillary items are
selected to address local or consortial
concerns
 Items from the initial LibQUAL+TM item
pool.
 Items written by previous consortial
groups.
alpha By Language
By Language
Group
American (all)
British (all)
French (all)
n
59,318
6,773
172
Service
Affect
.95
.93
.95
Info.
Control
.91
.87
.90
Lib as
Place
.88
.81
.89
TOTAL
.96
.94
.95
alpha by University Type
By University Type
Group
Comm Colleges
4 yr Not ARL
4 yr, ARL
Acad Health
n
4,189
36,430
14,080
3,263
Service
Affect
.96
.95
.95
.95
Info.
Control
.92
.91
.90
.92
Lib as
Place
.89
.88
.87
.90
TOTAL
.97
.96
.96
.96
World LibQUAL+™ Survey
Participating Libraries
Rapid Growth in Other Areas

Languages






American English
British English
French
Dutch
Swedish
Types of Institutions







Consortia

Each may create 5 local
questions to add to their
survey




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
™
350
316
300
250
255
200
206
150
164
100
50
43
0
12
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
LibQUAL+ Implementation
™
Interpretation:
Mean Perceived Scores (n=34)
7.2000
7.0000
2002 Data
6.8000
6.6000
6.4000
6.2000
6.0000
6.0000
6.2000
6.4000
6.6000
2001 Data
6.8000
7.0000
7.2000
LibQUAL+ 2004 Summary
Colleges or Universities
Undergraduates – American English
™
(n = 37,661)
LibQUAL+ 2004 Summary
Colleges or Universities
Graduates – American English
™
(n = 16,750)
LibQUAL+ 2004 Summary
Colleges or Universities
Faculty – American English
™
(n = 11,755)
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/Manual/index.cfm
LibQUAL+ Contact
Information
™

Martha Kyrillidou



Mary Jackson



LibQUAL+™ Services Manager
[email protected]
MaShana Davis



Senior Program for Office of Statistics and Measurement
[email protected]
LibQUAL+™ Technical Communications Liaison
[email protected]
Richard Groves


Statistics Research Assistant
[email protected]