An Introduction to LibQUAL+ Introduction to LibQUAL+ Workshop University of Westminster, London 21st January 2008 Selena Killick Association of Research Libraries old.libqual.org

The Day Ahead Introductions Introduction to LibQUAL+ and Background on the U.K./SCONUL Consortium Process Overview The votes are in! What next? Questions & Answers

old.libqual.org Introduction to LibQUAL+ and Background on the U.K./SCONUL Consortium Premise; Dimensions and Methodology

old.libqual.org The need for LibQUAL+ Underlying need to demonstrate our worth The reallocation of resources from traditional services and functions Rapid shifts in information-seeking behavior Need to keep abreast of customer demands Increasing user demands 37% of UK 16 – 18 year olds expect better libraries in return for their top-up fees

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

old.libqual.org LibQUAL+ Development 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 an 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

old.libqual.org 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

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

old.libqual.org

Dimensions items56 items25 items22 items Affect of Service Library as Place Reliability Personal Control Information Control Provision of Physical Collections Self-Reliance Information Access Access to Information

old.libqual.org Dimensions of Library Service Quality Information Control Library Service Quality Self-Reliance Equipment Timeliness Ease of Navigation Convenience Scope of Content Affect of Service Library as Place Reliability Assurance Responsiveness Empathy Refuge Symbol Utilitarian Space

old.libqual.org World LibQUAL+ ® Survey

old.libqual.org Rapid Growth in Other Areas Languages Afrikaans American English British English Danish Dutch Finnish French German Norwegian Swedish Consortia *Each may create 5 local questions to add to their survey Countries Australia, Canada, Denmark, Egypt, Finland, France, Hong Kong, New Zealand, the Netherlands, Norway, South Africa, Sweden, Switzerland, UAE, U.K., U.S. Types of Institutions Academic Health Sciences Academic Law Academic Military College or University Community College Electronic European Business European Parliament Family History Research Centers (FFRDC) Libraries High School (2007) Hospital National Health Service England Natural Resources New York Public Public Smithsonian State University/TAFE

old.libqual.org LibQUAL+ Languages Over 700 institutions 1,000,000 respondents

old.libqual.org LibQUAL+® Participants * 2007 data reflects Session I data only

old.libqual.org LibQUAL+ ® Surveys by Type Year Type Academic Health Sciences Academic Law Academic Military College or University Canadian Government 6 Community College Electronic 1 European Business 5 16 Family History 1 2 Hospital 1011 National Health Services England 10 Natural Resources 4 New York Public 1 Public Research Centers (FFRDC) Libraries 521 Smithsonian 1 1 State University/TAFE 211 * 2007 data reflects Session I data only

old.libqual.org Participating Libraries by Country Year Country Australia 1621 Canada Denmark 1 2 Egypt 1 21 Finland 2 France 1 21 Ireland 1121 Mexico 1 Netherlands 11 5 New Zealand 11 Norway 2 South Africa 1282 Sweden 3442 Switzerland 2 2 U.A.E. 1 U.K * 2007 data reflects Session I data only

old.libqual.org LibQUAL+ and SCONUL

old.libqual.org LibQUAL+ and SCONUL Coordinated on behalf of the Society of College, National & University Libraries (SCONUL) Working Group on Performance Improvement (WGPI) UK Higher Education (HE) institutions agree to pilot the survey in a consortium of SCONUL Members Pilot seen as a success Consortium of SCONUL Libraries has participated in LibQUAL+ annually since Different institutions in 6 years

old.libqual.org LibQUAL+ Participants 2003 University of Bath Cranfield University Royal Holloway & Bedford New College University of Lancaster University of Wales, Swansea University of Edinburgh University of Glasgow University of Liverpool University of London Library University of Oxford University College Northampton University of Wales College Newport University of Gloucestershire De Montfort University Leeds Metropolitan University Liverpool John Moores University Robert Gordon University South Bank University University of the West of England, Bristol University of Wolverhampton

old.libqual.org LibQUAL+ Participants 2004 Brunel University Loughborough University University of Strathclyde University of York Glasgow University Sheffield University Trinity College, Dublin UMIST + University of Manchester University of Liverpool Anglia Polytechnic University University of Westminster London South Bank University Napier University Queen Margaret University College University College Worcester University of East London

old.libqual.org LibQUAL+ Participants 2005 University of Exeter University of Edinburgh University of Dundee University of Bath University of Ulster University College Northampton University of Birmingham Roehampton University University of Glasgow University of Surrey Royal Holloway UoL City University Cranfield University University of Luton Dublin Institute of Technology London South Bank University

old.libqual.org LibQUAL+ Participants 2006 Cambridge University Library Cranfield University Goldsmiths College Institute of Education Institute of Technology Tallaght Queen Mary, University of London Robert Gordon University St. George's University of London University of Aberdeen University of Central Lancashire University of Glasgow University of Gloucestershire University of Leeds University of Leicester University of Liverpool University of the West of England University of Warwick University of Westminster London South Bank University

old.libqual.org LibQUAL+ Participants 2007 Anglia Ruskin University Cambridge University Library Coventry University Cranfield University De Montfort University London South Bank University Napier University Nottingham Trent University Royal Holloway University of London School of Oriental and African Studies Senate House Library, University of London University of Bath University of Birmingham University of Central Lancashire University of Edinburgh University of Leeds University of Limerick University of Manchester University of Surrey University of Wales Bangor

old.libqual.org LibQUAL+ Participants 2008 University of Westminster University of Glasgow University of Leeds Liverpool John Moores University University of York Cranfield University University of Warwick University of Cumbria University of Central Lancashire University of the Arts London London Metropolitan University Queen Mary, University of London University of Bangor University of Liverpool Robert Gordon University Southampton Solent University University College London St Andrews University University College, Cork

old.libqual.org The LibQUAL+ Questionnaire

old.libqual.org Process Overview Register with ARL (2008 cost $3,000) Institutional contact sets survey to local needs Local Questions Disciplines Send out a URL to the survey via Mounted on ARL servers Watch the surveys come in Close the survey when ready, institutional results available after a couple of weeks PDF SPSS Excel

old.libqual.org Time frame December – Registration January – UK Training February to May – Session I July to December – Session II January 2009 – Consortium results available

old.libqual.org Survey Composition 22 Core Questions –Affect of Service –Information Control –Library as Place 5 Local Questions (optional) 5 Information Literacy Questions 3 General Satisfaction Questions Library Usage Patterns Demographics Free Text Comments Box

old.libqual.org Five Local Questions Participants can choose 5 questions to add to their survey from a range of over 100 Helping participants focus on local issues Maintaining standardisation for benchmarking purposes

old.libqual.org Free-Text Comments Box 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 Available in real-time enabling prompt responses to concerns

old.libqual.org Usage & Demographics Library Usage User group Discipline Age Sex Gender Attached to SPSS and Excel results Enabling detailed further analysis by type

old.libqual.org Survey Instrument

old.libqual.org Gap Theory For the 22 items LibQUAL+ asks users’ to rate their: Minimum service level Desired service level Perceived service performance This gives us a ‘Zone of Tolerance’ for each question; the distance between minimally acceptable and desired service ratings Perception ratings ideally fall within the Zone of Tolerance

old.libqual.org Perceived is greater than desired Perceived is greater than minimum, less than desired Perceived is less than minimum Minimum Desired Perceived Gap Theory

old.libqual.org Results from SCONUL

old.libqual.org Core Questions

old.libqual.org SCONUL Core Question Summary 2007

old.libqual.org SCONUL Core Question Summary 2006

old.libqual.org SCONUL Core Question Summary 2005

old.libqual.org SCONUL Core Question Summary 2004

old.libqual.org SCONUL Results by Dimension

old.libqual.org SCONUL Results by User Group

old.libqual.org General findings Highly desired Making electronic resources accessible from my home or office Print and/or electronic journals I require for my work A haven for study, learning or research Lowest Library staff who instil confidence in users Giving users individual attention Space for group learning and group study

old.libqual.org Comments

old.libqual.org Free text comments received 2006 Aberdeen University574 Cambridge University106 Cranfield University147 Glasgow University620 Goldsmith College399 Institute of Education, UoL487 Institute of Technology Tallaght200 London South Bank University382 Queen Mary, UoL745 Robert Gordon University181 Scottish Agricultural College134 St George’s, UoL299 University of Central Lancashire 654 University of Gloucestershire 412 University of Leeds888 University of Leicester791 University of Liverpool255 University of the West of England, Bristol 736 University of Warwick355 University of Westminster916

old.libqual.org Comments Comparisons Total number of comments 2006 = 9,281 Total number of comments 2005 = 8,368 Total number of comments 2004 = 8,161 Total number of comments 2003 = 7,342

old.libqual.org Expect everything From: The library in DCMT is one of the best, if not the best, departments of the campus. The staff are outstanding, professional, helpful and extremely friendly. The place is always inviting and welcoming. To: The library is consistently unimpressive, except as a consumer of funds and resources. And everything in between!

old.libqual.org Feedback from UK Participants

old.libqual.org Why use LibQUAL? Feedback from LibQUAL+ Users “Why did you choose to use LibQUAL+?” LibQUAL+ was recommended to us as offering a well designed, thoroughly Library-focused set of survey tools Cost-effectiveness Automated processing & fast delivery of results Opportunity to benchmark Respectability and comparability (with others and historically)

old.libqual.org The benefits of LibQUAL+ LibQUAL+ has enabled us to find out what a broad range of our users thought of the services we offer; what level of service- delivery quality we had achieved in their eyes, and to get a clear picture of what they actually wanted the Library to deliver (as opposed to what we thought they wanted). UK HE Institution, 2006

old.libqual.org 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, national and inter-institutional levels Offers opportunities for highlighting and improving your status within the institution Can help in securing funding for the Library