Service priority alignment in Association of Research Libraries (ARL) member libraries Damon Jaggars...

Service priority alignment in Association of Research Libraries

(ARL) member libraries

Damon Jaggars & Shanna SmithUniversity of Texas at Austin

Jocelyn DuffyPortland State University

7th Northumbria International Conference on Performance Measurement in Libraries and Information Services

Stellenbosch, South Africa

August 14, 2007

LibQUAL+ instrument

- 22 items (1-9 Likert scale)

- Minimum, Perceived, Desired

- Dimensions of Service Quality: Affect of Service (AS), Information Control (IC), Library as Place (LP)

Information Control Undergraduate Graduate Faculty StaffEasy-to-use access tools that allow me to find things on my own 3 5 5 8Making information easily accessible for independent use 6 6 6 13Making electronic resources accessible from my home or office 1 3 2 22A library website enabling me to locate information on my own 7.5 4 4 6Modern equipment that lets me easily access the information I need 2 7 10 15** Print and/or electronic journal collections I require for my work 12.5 1.5 1 10.5** The printed library materials I need for my work 16 10 8.5 14* The electronic information resources I need 12.5 1.5 3 12

Affect of ServiceReadiness to respond to users' questions 15 12 13 5Employees who understand the needs of their users 19 14 11.5 7Employees who deal with users in a caring fashion 18 17 15 10.5Employees who instill confidence in users 21 20 16 9Employees who have the knowledge to answer user questions 10 9 8.5 3Willingness to help users 17 11 14 2Giving users individual attention 22 22 17 17Dependability in handling users' service problems 4.5 8 11.5 4Employees who are consistently courteous 14 13 7 1

Library as Place** A getaway for study, learning, or research 4.5 15 19 18** Library space that inspires study and learning 11 19 20 19** Quiet space for individual activities 7.5 18 21 16A comfortable and inviting location 9 16 18 20* Community space for group learning and group study 18 21 22 21

Desired Mean Ranking 2005

Calculating Priority Index• Define service priorities for individual respondents by re-scaling desired

scores

• Illustration: – Betty, a member of the library staff– Very high expectations; average desired score across all 22 items

is 8.8. – Some items more important than others to her

• Desired score for “comfortable and inviting location” is 7• Desired score for “employees who deal with users in a caring

fashion” is 9– Re-scale Betty’s scores around her individual mean of 8.8 to

calculate priority scores– New scores: -1.8 for inviting location (below-average); +0.2 for

caring for users (above-average)

Results for UT Austin Analysis

• Library staff set a lower service priority than users on several IC items

• Library staff set a higher service priority than users on several AS items

• Library staff prioritize higher than faculty, lower than undergraduates, and similarly to graduate students on LP items

• Are our local results generalizable across the larger library community, specifically the ARL cohort?

ARL Cohort Study Sample

• ARL cohort for 2006 LibQUAL+ survey administration

• 45 ARL libraries

• 28,851 useable surveys submitted: – 10,856 from undergraduates– 11,157 from graduate students– 6,214 from faculty– 624 from library staff

Average Faculty & Library Staff Priority Scores for 7 Selected ARL Libraries

Making electronic resources accessible from my home or office (IC1)

Information Control: ARL Cohort

E-resources from home/office

Website/information on own

Printed materials

E-resources I need

Modern equipment

Easy-to-use access tools

Making information accessible

Print or e-journals

Affect of Service: ARL Cohort

Instill confidence

Individual attention

Courteous

Ready response

Knowledge

Caring

Understand needs

Willing to help

Dependable

Library as Place: ARL Cohort

Inspire study & learning

Quiet space/individual

Comforting/inviting

A getaway

Group learning/study

Results from ARL Cohort Study

• Misalignments in service priorities found in the local analysis confirmed and expanded in the ARL cohort analysis

• Library staff set a lower service priority for most IC items

• Library staff set a higher service priority for all AS items (except AS #9 – Dependability of service)

• Library staff prioritize higher than faculty, lower than undergraduates, and similarly to graduate students on LP items

Conclusions

• ARL Cohort library staff, in general, have not yet internalized the extent to which many users prioritize unmediated access to easy-to-use, quality content and services and de-emphasize traditional mediated service.

• Disparate, and sometimes conflicting, service priorities of our core user groups, especially faculty and undergraduates is a complicating factor.

• A challenge for library leadership to work with staff to better align organizational service priorities with evolving user needs and demonstrated behaviors.

Possible Limitations

• Assumption: Users’ desired scores on the LibQUAL+ survey can be used to indicate the relative importance of a survey item

• Relatively small sample size of library staff

• Point of view staff take when responding to the survey

Future Research

• Are the service priorities of staff and users diverging over time?

• Is it useful to compare the service priorities of an individual library’s staff against the cohort (or a chosen cohort)?

Local - ARL Cohort Comparison

F = Faculty

G = Graduate students

U = Undergraduates

“+” = Library staff set higher service priority

“-” = Library staff set lower service priority

Red = marginally higher or lower prioritization

Item UT Austin ARL Cohort

AS-1 Employees who instill confidence in users F+G+U+ F+G+U+AS-2 Giving users individual attention G+U+ F+G+U+AS-3 Employees who are consistently courteous U+ F+G+U+AS-4 Readiness to respond to users' questions F+G+U+AS-5 Employees who have the knowledge to answer user questions F+G+U+AS-6 Employees who deal with users in a caring fashion F+G+U+AS-7 Employees who understand the needs of their users F+G+U+AS-8 Willingness to help users F+G+U+AS-9 Dependability in handling users' service problems F-IC-1 Making electronic resources accessible from my home or office F-G-U- F-G-U-IC-2 A library Web site enabling me to locate information on my own F-G- F-G-U-IC-3 The printed library materials I need for my work U+ F-G-U-IC-4 The electronic information resources I need F-G- F-G-U-IC-5 Modern equipment that lets me easily access needed information F-G-U-IC-6 Easy-to-use access tools that allow me to find things on my own F-G- F-G-U-IC-7 Making information easily accessible for independent use F-G- F-G-U-IC-8 Print and/or electronic journal collections I require for my work F-G- F-G-LP-1 Library space that inspires study and learning F+U- F+U-LP-2 Quiet space for individual activities F+U- F+G-U-LP-3 A comfortable and inviting location U- F+U-LP-4 A getaway for study, learning, or research F+ F+G-U-LP-5 Community space for group learning and group study F+G+ F+U-

Contact Information

Damon JaggarsUniversity of Texas Librariesjaggars@austin.utexas.edu(512) 495-4321

Shanna SmithDivision of Statistics and Scientific ComputationUniversity of Texas at Austinsesmith@austin.utexas.edu(512) 475-9425

Jocelyn DuffyPortland State University Libraryjduffy@pdx.edu(503) 725-4126