1. LibQUAL+™ Introduction
Auckland, NZ
April 5, 2005
Presented by:
Colleen Cook
Bruce Thompson

2. Total Circulation Note. M. Kyrillidou and M. Young. (2003).
ARL Statistics Washington, D.C.: ARL, p.8.

3. Reference Transactions
Note. M. Kyrillidou and M. Young. (2003).
ARL Statistics Washington, D.C.: ARL, p.8.

4. Assessment Sarah Pritchard, Library Trends, 1996
“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

5. LibQUAL+™ Goals
Improve mechanisms and protocols for evaluating libraries
Develop web-based tools for assessing library service quality
Identify best practices in providing library service
Support libraries seeking to understand changes in user behavior
Assist libraries seeking to re-position library services in the new environment

6. LibQUAL+™ Outcomes
Securing information that contributes meaningfully to planning and improvement efforts at a local level
Providing analytical frameworks that institutional staff can apply without extensive training or assistance
Helping decision-makers understand success of investments
Finding useful inter-institutional comparisons

7. 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.

8. 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.

9. Extended GAPS Model Organizational Barriers to SQ
Customers’ Assessment of SQ
Poor Upward
Communication
Poor Horizontal
Poor Tech - Job
Fit
Perception of
Infeasibility
GAP 1
Reliability
Responsiveness
Assurance
Empathy
Tangibles
GAP 2
GAP 5
GAP 3
GAP 4

10. Emergent QUAL QUAN Iterative 2000 2004 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
2004
315 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

11. “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

12. Survey Instrument

13. Rapid Growth in Other Areas
Languages
American English
British English
French
Dutch
Swedish
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

14. LibQUAL+™ Participants

15. World LibQUAL+™ Survey
Participating Libraries

16. LibQUAL+™ Resources LibQUAL+™ Website: http://www.libqual.org
Publications:
Events and Training:
Gap Theory/Radargraph Introduction:
LibQUAL+™ Procedures Manual:

17. LibQUAL+™ Contact Information
Martha Kyrillidou
Senior Program for Office of Statistics and Measurement
Amy Hoseth
LibQUAL+™ Communications Coordinator
Jonathan D. Sousa
Technical Applications Development Manager