Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Measuring Library Patron Satisfaction using CMT

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Measuring Library Patron Satisfaction using CMT"— Presentation transcript:

1 Measuring Library Patron Satisfaction using CMT
Customer Satisfaction Survey Results Oxford County Library November, 2004 Presented at OLA Super Conference, Toronto February 5, 2005

2 Oxford County Library 18 branches: Ingersoll and 17 rural villages
Serving a total population base of about 50,000 in Oxford County outside Woodstock and Tillsonburg

3 Why measure customer satisfaction?
Satisfied customers return. Dissatisfied customers avoid returning and drive away potential new business. Therefore, we place value customer satisfaction, want to know what level we achieve and strive to offer high quality service. Quantify service performance for funders, especially re: employment services. Promote library to community

4 Our Survey Based on Common Measurements Tool
Supported by HRSDC and Library Strategic Development Fund, Ontario Ministry of Culture All 18 branches November 8-27 (November coincided with library “count week”) One page questionnaire, self-administered Incentive: draw for Rand McNally Ontario Road Atlas (value $24.95), 2 consolation prizes of Rand McNally Pocket Road Atlas (value $8.95 each)

5

6 Results Total questionnaires returned 713
Total survey ballots completed 709 Total repeats Unique responses (minimum) 665 Participants at all branches

7 How did we get so many? Staff teamwork and commitment Incentive
Anonymity assured Patrons like OCL branches and staff and want to show support Concern for security of service location Simple questionnaire – 1 page, multiple choice questions Invitation to submit more detailed comments

8 Who responded? Draw tickets included phone number
Based on telephone exchange, a minimum of 83% were “local”

9 Services Used Books Computers Program/event Jobs Other 74 % 21 %
Gov’t info Other

10 Frequency of Use Monthly Weekly Multiple/ week Infrequently First Time
35 % 32% Multiple/ week Infrequently First Time

11 I was treated fairly 93.6 % n/a

12 Staff were knowledgeable and competent
91.1 % n/a

13 I waited a reasonable amount of time at the service location
83.7 % n/a

14 Staff were courteous 92.7 % n/a

15 Staff went the extra mile to make sure I got what I wanted
90.9 % n/a

16 I was informed of everything I had to do to get service
90.2 % n/a

17 Satisfaction with amount of time it took to get service
91.5 % n/a Satisfied Dissatisfied

18 Satisfaction with accessibility of service
90.1 % n/a Satisfied Dissatisfied

19 Satisfaction with overall quality of service delivery
91.1 % n/a Satisfied Dissatisfied

20 Did you get what you needed?
98.6 %

21 Would you use the service again?
100 %

22 Nice numbers…. But of what value are they?

23 Weighting Responses to Facilitate Comparisons
Strongly agree: # responses x 1 Agree: # responses x 2 Neither agree nor disagree: # responses x 3 Disagree: # responses x 4 Strongly disagree: # responses x 5 No answer/not applicable: not included

24 Average Performance Scores

25 Average Performance Scores: All respondents and 1st time users

26 Average Performance Scores: All respondents and Job seekers

27 Average Satisfaction Scores

28 Average Satisfaction Scores: All Respondents and 1st time users

29 Average Satisfaction Scores: All Respondents and Job seekers

30 Advice on the use of CMT Pretest questionnaire Avoid distractions
Introduction of new circ system Other survey underway Not appropriate in its present form for feedback on events

31 Biases Community perception about motivation behind/use of survey
Personal relationship between staff and respondents

32 Concerns about CMT Satisfaction ratings without respondents’ comments difficult to interpret accurately Response may be indicative of nature of service performed, yet not reflect performance Repetitive multiple choice questions invite repetitive thoughtless answers Use CMT to measure system (not individual) service performance Staff perception of intended purpose of survey may impact response rate and results

33 Special Programs Coordinator c/o Innerkip Public Library
George Stock Special Programs Coordinator Oxford County Library c/o Innerkip Public Library Innerkip, ON N0J 1M0 (519)


Download ppt "Measuring Library Patron Satisfaction using CMT"

Similar presentations


Ads by Google