1. LibQUAL+ and the Library Summit Concept London February 3, 2006 Fred Heath Vice Provost and Director, University of Texas Libraries fheath@austin.utexas.edu

2. You Have your Libqual+ Data: Now What? The Library Summit

3. Why Assess? 1. Because our bosses demand it: Libraries are expensive. 2. Because our accrediting agencies require it. 3. Because our customers deserve to be listened to. 4. Because we want to repair our deficits and adapt to evolving behaviors.

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

5. It ain’t your grandmother’s library…any more Speed of change no longer incremental Rate of change is transformational

6. Changing Behaviors Anecdotal indicators Operational evidence Research information

7. “…everyone in class tried to get those articles on line and some people didn’t even bother to to to the stacks when they couldn’t Google them.” Graduate Student NYT Online 6/21/04 (Katie Hafner, “Old search engine in the the library tries to fit into a Google world”)

8. Reference Decrease Note. M. Kyrillidou and M. Young. (2002). ARL Statistics 2000-01. Washington, D.C.: ARL, p.7.

9. Searches for Online Journals UT Austin Libraries 2002-2004 Monthly

10. Total File Requests - UT Austin Libraries 2000-2003

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

12. Faculty: Dependence on Electronic Resources Will Increase “I will become increasingly dependent on electronic research resources in the future.” http://www.arl.org/arl/proceedings/144/guthrie_files/guthrie.ppt

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

14. LibQUAL+: Reasons for being To answer necessity for assessment To detect rapid shifts in information-seeking behavior To facilitate reallocation of resources from traditional services and functions

15. Peer Assessment University of Texas Libraries compares favorably to peers University of Washington University of Wisconsin – Madison UCLA Ohio State University University of Minnesota – Twin Cities

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

17. Information Control scores. UT had…higher perceived scores than did the peer group. UT had a larger adequacy gap and a significantly smaller superiority gap than did the peer groups.

18. Constituent Groups What are the differences we can recognize by constituent group? –Undergraduate –Graduate Students –Faculty –Library Staff

19. Constituent Groups What are the differences we can recognize by constituent group? –Undergraduate –Graduate Students –Faculty –Library Staff

21. Consider Discipline Differences Are there statistically different behaviors by discipline to which we need to respond?

22. Humanities (N = 103) Humanities had significantly lower perceived scores for Library as Place (Humanities = 6.15; other UT = 6.565). The adequacy gap for Affect of Service was marginally higher (Humanities = 1.089; other UT = 0.778).

23. Engineering & Computer Science (N = 112) Respondents from Engineering and Computer Science had significantly lower minimum (E & CS = 5.771; other UT = 6.230) standards for Affect of Service and Information Control (E & CS = 6.462; other UT = 6.742). The perceived rating for Information Control was also significantly lower (E & CS = 7.979; other UT = 8.188). The adequacy gap was significantly larger for Affect of Service (E & CS = 1.197; other UT = 0.757) and overall (E & CS = 0.939; other UT = 0.607).

25. What next? … the Library Summit

26. Clemson University Libraries Clemson University Clemson University Libraries Clemson University The Clemson Summit Concept Concept initiated by President Summits are organized around a university function Bring university constituents together to focus on one area Take the leap!

27. Why hold a Library Summit? Discuss current state of library service quality Generate fresh ideas for change and improvement from the University community Gather qualitative data for strategic planning process from external constituents Allowed me as a new Vice Provost to strategically engage the entire academic community

28. Summit Overview Modeled after Clemson University Libraries Summit Invited representatives from campus community President Faulkner opened the Summit Major opinion makers, critics Participant information packet

29. Summit Overview, cont’d Facilitated roundtable discussions focused on service quality dimensions How to improve where service quality is currently below users’ expectations or deteriorating over time Focus on “how to” not “can’t do”

30. Summit Agenda 9:00 – 10:00 AM Introductory Remarks (Dr. Faulkner) Purpose of Summit(Dr. Heath) Brief Introduction to LibQUAL+ Expected Outcomes 10:00 – 11:00 AM Roundtable #1 11:00 – noon Roundtable #2 noon – 1:00 PM Lunch

31. Statistical analysis Focus group facilitators Participants Invitations and information packet Event coordination Survey comments Adequacy Gaps Community feedback Summit Checklist

32. Roundtable Discussions Discussions organized around LibQUAL+ dimensions Choose different topic for each session Innovative and constructive solutions from your perspective Negative gaps & “danger zones” Focus on “how to” not “can’t do” Facilitator & library staff roles

33. Analyze and sort focus group data Items assigned to appropriate AD for implementation Timelines set and posted to web site Communicate changes to University community on ongoing basis After the Summit

34. Service Quality Assessment and Improvement Site http://www.lib.utexas.edu/vprovost/assessment/index.html LibQUAL+ results and analyses Library Summit info and focus group data Improvement projects and timetables

35. Service Quality Assessment and Improvement Site http://www.lib.utexas.edu/vprovost/assessment/index.html LibQUAL+ results and analyses Library Summit info and focus group data Improvement projects and timetables

41. Coffee bar in both PCL and UGL The library to more actively enforce cell phone and noise policies Fewer and more clearly defined service points in PCL and UGL More couches and comfortable chairs in all library facilities Ubiquitous wireless access in all library facilities; more power Longer business hours in a number of library facilities Better photocopiers with additional functionality Both quiet spaces and areas where you can talk and work in groups Major Themes: Library as Place

44. Library staff to be friendly, courteous and approachable The library to better market services to the University community Better access to subject specialists Library staff to be more proactive, to “roam” the library looking for opportunities to help users and to more actively promote services to faculty and departments Major Themes: Affect of Service

47. More services and notifications accessible online through the library web site, UT Direct and email The library web site and UTNetCAT to function more like Google and Amazon.com with additional personalization, seamless linking and alert services Well-designed, easy-to-use searching and help interfaces on the library web site and UTNetCAT More accessible instruction in how to use library resources both online and in-person Books and other materials to be delivered to campus addresses Major Themes: Personal Control

50. SFX & MetaLib

51. Providing “negative” information from LIBQUAL+ results was very positive (Psychology: “disconfirming expectancy” An organization that makes its weaknesses public and asks for advice gains positive regard Participants tend to take ownership of their ideas Input from Summit participants provides richer and more detailed data for management decision making What we learned

52. Alternate years between community and staff library summits Focus on middle managers and supervisors Reinforce “holistic” idea of customer service and the need for constant improvement Gain valuable feedback from staff about improving services Next step… Staff Library Summit

53. Trends: Access to Information by Status

54. Alignment of values Can we be sure that our priorities, values correctly align with those of our constituents? If a case for misalignment can be made, what can we do to align ourselves more effectively?

57. - 30 -