1. Dr. Fred Heath, Vice Provost of General Libraries
8th International
Bielefeld Conference
Academic Library and Information Services: New Paradigms for the Digital Age
Bielefeld, Germany
February 8, 2006
Presented by:
Dr. Colleen Cook, Dean
Texas A&M University
&
Dr. Fred Heath, Vice Provost of General Libraries
University of Texas

2. Why Assess?
“In an age of accountability, there is a pressing need for an effective…process to evaluate and compare research libraries.”
700 participants in LibQUAL+™
123 Association of Research Libraries (ARL) alone, over $3.4 billion dollars were expended in 2003/2004
Note. M. Kyrillidou and M. Young. (2005).
ARL Statistics Washington, D.C.: ARL, p.5.

3. Libraries Remain a Credible Resource in 21st Century
98% agree with statement, “My … library contains information from credible and known sources.”
Note. Digital Library Federation and Council on Library and Information
Resources. (2002). Dimensions and Use of the Scholarly Information Environment.

4. Changing Behaviors Recent Survey:
Only 15.7% agreed with the statement “The Internet has not changed the way I use the library.”
Note. Digital Library Federation and Council on Library and Information
Resources. (2002). Dimensions and Use of the Scholarly Information Environment.

5. Faculty: Dependence on Electronic Resources Will Increase
“I will become increasingly dependent on electronic research resources in the future.”

6. Research Behavior: Personal Control
When searching for print journals for research:
Only 13.9% ask a librarian for assistance
Only 3.2% consider consulting a librarian a preferred way of identifying information
Note. Digital Library Federation and Council on Library and Information
Resources. (2002). Dimensions and Use of the Scholarly Information Environment.

7. Total Circulation
Note. M. Kyrillidou and M. Young. (2005). ARL Statistics Washington, D.C.: ARL, p.6.

8. Reference Transactions
Note. M. Kyrillidou and M. Young. (2005). ARL Statistics Washington, D.C.: ARL, p.6.

9. Web Usage Total File Requests - UT Austin Libraries 2000-2003

10. Enter LibQUAL+™ The necessity of assessment
Rapid shifts in information-seeking behavior
The reallocation of resources from traditional services and functions

11. The LibQUAL+™ Premise “….only customers judge quality;
PERCEPTIONS SERVICE
“….only customers judge quality;
all other judgments are essentially
irrelevant”
Note. Zeithaml, Parasuraman, Berry. (1999).
Delivering quality service. NY: The Free Press.

12. Emergent QUAL QUAN Iterative 2000 2005 LibQUAL+™ Project
13 Libraries
English LibQUAL+™ Version
4000 Respondents
QUAL
QUAN
PURPOSE DATA ANALYSIS PRODUCT/RESULT
Describe library environment;
build theory of library service quality from user perspective
Test LibQUAL+™ instrument
Refine theory
of service quality
Refine LibQUAL+™ instrument
Test LibQUAL+™
instrument
Unstructured interviews
at 8 ARL institutions
Web-delivered survey
Unstructured interviews at Health Sciences and the Smithsonian libraries
to survey
administrators
Focus groups
Content analysis:
(cards & Atlas TI)
Reliability/validity
analyses: Cronbachs
Alpha, factor analysis,
SEM, descriptive statistics
Content analysis
Reliability/validity analyses including Cronbachs Alpha,
factor analysis, SEM, descriptive statistics
Vignette
Re-tooling
Iterative
Emergent
2000
2005
700 Libraries English, Dutch, Swedish,
German LibQUAL+™ Versions
160,000 anticipated respondents
LibQUAL+™ 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

13. 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

14. LoadedPT:P1:01xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
LoadedPT:P1:01xxxxxxxxxxxxxx.txt,S:\Admin\Colleen\ServQual Interviews\TEXT Only\01xxxxxxxxx.txt (redirected: c:\zz\atlasti\fred

16. Dimensions of Library Service Quality
Empathy
Information
Control
Responsiveness
Symbol
Utilitarian space
Assurance
Scope of Content
Ease of Navigation
Self -
Reliance
Library as Place
Library
Service
Quality
Model 3
Refuge
Affect of Service
Reliability
Convenience
Timeliness
Equipment

17. 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

18. 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

19. Information Control
“…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

20. Information Control
“By habit, I usually try to be self-sufficient. And I’ve found that I am actually fairly proficient. I usually find what I’m looking for eventually. So I personally tend to ask a librarian only as a last resort.”
Graduate student

21. 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.

22. LibQUAL+™ Resources
An ARL/Texas A&M University joint developmental effort based on SERVQUAL.
LibQUAL+™ initially supported by a 3-year grant from the U.S. Department of Education’s Fund for the Improvement of Post-Secondary Education (FIPSE)
Initial project established a expert team, re-grounded SERVQUAL concepts, and designed survey methodology
Survey conducted at over 700 libraries resulting in a data base of over half a million user responses
NSF funded project to refocus LibQUAL+™ on the National Science Digital Library (NSDL)

23. World LibQUAL+™ Survey 2005
Participating Libraries

24. LibQUAL+™ Languages

25. Rapid Growth in Other Areas
Languages
American English
British English
French
Dutch
Swedish
In development
Chinese
Greek
Spanish
German
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

26. “22 items” 2000 2001 2002 2003 41-items 56-items 25-items 22-items
Affect of Service
Service Affect
Reliability
Library as Place
Personal Control
Information Control
Provision of Physical Collections
Self-Reliance
Information Access
Access to Information

27. Survey Instrument

28. “And a 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.

29. Understanding LibQUAL+™ Results
Measures the distance between minimally acceptable and desired service quality ratings
Perception ratings ideally fall within the Zone of Tolerance

30. Key to Bar Charts

31. LibQUAL+™ 2004 Summary Colleges or Universities American English

32. Adequacy Gap The difference between the minimum and perceived score
LibQUAL+™

33. Score Norms
Norm Conversion Tables facilitate the interpretation of observed scores using norms created for a large and representative sample.
LibQUAL+™ norms have been created at both the individual and institutional level

34. LibQUAL+™ Interactive Institution Statistics

35. In Closing LibQUAL+™
Focuses on success from the users’ point of view (outcomes)
Demonstrates that a web-based survey can handle large numbers; users are willing to fill it out; and survey can be executed quickly with minimal expense
Requires limited local survey expertise and resources
Analysis available at local and inter-institutional levels
Offers many opportunities for using demographics to discern user behaviors

36. LibQUAL+™ Resources LibQUAL+™ Website: http://www.libqual.org
Publications:
Events and Training:
LibQUAL+™ Bibliography:
LibQUAL+™ Procedures Manual:

37. LibQUAL+™ Contact Information
Amy Hoseth
LibQUAL+™ Communications Coordinator
Richard Groves
Statistics Research Assistant
MaShana Davis
Junior Technical Applications Developer
Martha Kyrillidou
Director, ARL Statistics and Measurement Program

38. https://webspace.utexas.edu/fh355/www/

39. - 30 -