Measuring the Value of Academic Libraries Michigan Library Association May 2010 Carol Tenopir University of Tennessee ctenopir@utk.edu 1

Methods for measuring value Experiments Critical incident Contingent valuation Observations Conjoint measurement Interviews Usage Citations Focus groups Return on Investment Perceptions

Value of libraries can be measured in many ways: Implicit value (i.e., usage, downloads) Explicit value (i.e., Interviews) Derived values (i.e., ROI) 3

Average Number of Article Readings per Year and Average Minutes per Reading by University Faculty in the US (percent change)

Going beyond implied value to show… Purpose Outcomes Return on Investment (ROI) And help make decisions for the future

Series of Studies Surveys by Tenopir & King, 1977-Present using critical incident of last article reading ROI in grants, Phase 1: case study at University of Illinois, completed 2008 Phase 2: expanded to 8 countries (report coming soon) Value and ROI for grants/research, teaching, student engagement (2010-2012) (LibValue)

4/22/2017 Critical Incident “The following questions in this section refer to the SCHOLARLY ARTICLE YOU READ MOST RECENTLY, even if you had read the article previously. Note that this last reading may not be typical, but will help us establish the range of patterns in reading.” 7

Principal Purpose of Reading (Faculty in U. S Principal Purpose of Reading (Faculty in U.S. and Australia, 2004-2006, n=1433) 51% 9% 11% 20% Research Teaching Current Awareness Proposals Other

4/22/2017 Source of reading by purpose of reading by faculty (Faculty in U.S. and Australia, 2004-2005, n=1412) Research Teaching Current Awareness 9

Proportion of readings that contain information that is rated as absolutely essential to the principal purpose

Proportion of readings that contain information that is rated as absolutely essential to the principal purpose

Readings for Research More likely to be rated “absolutely essential” More likely to be found by searching More likely to be from e-sources More likely to be from the library

Outcomes of Reading in Order of Frequency of Responses (n=880) Inspired new thinking (55%) Improved results (40%) Changed focus (27%) Resolved technical problems (12%) Saved time (12%) Faster completion (7%) Collaboration (6%) Wasted my time (<1% of readings)

E-Collections improve efficiency, writing, and research “I could not do the kind of research or teaching I do without these resources.” “E-access is essential for scientific writing” “[e-access] saves me a lot of time which can be used for more extensive reading.”

Derived measures Return on Investment (ROI) is a quantitative measure expressed as a ratio of the value returned to the institution for each monetary unit invested in the library. For every $/€/£ spent on the library, the university received ‘X’ $/€/£ in return. Demonstrate that library collections contribute to income-generating activities 15

ROI Phases 1 and 2 Faculty Grant Research Cycle LIBRARY Conduct Research Obtain Grants Write Articles Write Reports & Proposals 16

ROI for University of Illinois Grants (Phase 1) $4.38 grant income for each $1.00 invested in library (% of faculty who rated citations in proposals from library as important to the proposal x % of proposals funded) 17

Phase 2: Grants only 8 institutions in 8 countries 18

Phase 2: ROI Findings Research STM 13.2:1 to 15.5:1 Research and Teaching STM/Hum/SS 1.3:1 to 3.4:1 Research and Teaching Under 1:1 19

Administration Values: Measuring Up 1) Attract outstanding faculty Faculty with more publications and citations obtain more grants.* Faculty who publish more read more Faculty who receive awards read more 2) Retain outstanding faculty - “I would leave this university in a microsecond if the library deteriorated” - U.S. University *Ali & Bhattacharyya, “Research Grant and Faculty Productivity Nexus: Heterogeneity among Dissimilar Institutions.” Academic Analytics 20

Administration Values: Measuring Up 3) Foster innovative research “I am now able to explore and trace back topics and check the developments that arose along the topic history making connections that were only dreams a few years ago.” -Western European Research Institute For every article cited, 27-40 more are read 4) Build research reputation of institution In 1 university, over 10 years a 1% increase in library budget correlates with a 1.07% increase in grant funding In another, over 10 years a 1% increase in library budget correlates with a 1.21% increase in grant funding 21

Administration Values: Measuring Up 5) Promote seamless integration of the library with institutional research activities - “With the current workload, I could not continue with research without the convenience of access from my own computer” – South African University - A doubling in article downloads, from 1 to 2 million, is statistically associated with dramatic increases in research productivity** **Research Information Network. 2009. E-journals: their use, value and impact. Report prepared by Research Information Network. 22

LibValue: Broaden focus 23

And anticipate change.. New Scholarly Endeavors That Cut Across the Library’s Functional Areas Research Social / Professional Teaching / Learning Scholarly Endeavors Functional Areas e-science Collaborative Scholarship Institutional Repositories 24

What we can show so far… E-articles are read for many purposes Academic library e-collections help faculty be productive and successful Libraries help generate grants income E-collections are valued by faculty ROI for grants varies by mission and location of institution Value can be measured in many ways 25

Some Final Thoughts on Measuring Value Tie what you measure to the mission of the university Measure outcomes, not inputs Quantitative data can show ROI and trends Qualitative data tell a story No one method stands alone Need to develop was to measure value of all library services 26

For further information: ctenopir@utk. edu Tenopir, C. (2009) For further information: ctenopir@utk.edu Tenopir, C. (2009). University Investment in the Library, Phase II: An International Study of the Library’s Value to the Grants Process. Report prepared for Elsevier LibraryConnect. 27

Tenopir, C. , King, D. W. , Edwards, S. , Wu, L. (2008) Tenopir, C., King, D. W., Edwards, S., Wu, L. (2008). Electronic journals and changes in scholarly article seeking and reading patterns. Aslib Proceedings, 61 (1), 5-32. Tenopir, C., King, D. W., Spencer, J., Wu, L. (2009). Variations in article seeking and reading patterns of academics: What makes a difference?. Library & Information Science Research, doi 10.1016.