Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
LibQUAL+ and theLibrary Summit Concept
LondonFebruary 3, 2006
Fred HeathVice Provost and Director, University of Texas Libraries
You Have your Libqual+ You Have your Libqual+ Data: Now What?Data: Now What?
The Library Summit
Why Assess?Why Assess?1.1. Because our bosses demand it: Libraries are Because our bosses demand it: Libraries are
expensive. expensive.
2.2. Because our accrediting agencies require Because our accrediting agencies require it.it.
3.3. Because our customers deserve to be Because our customers deserve to be listened to.listened to.
4.4. Because we want to repair our deficits and adapt Because we want to repair our deficits and adapt to evolving behaviors.to evolving behaviors.
Libraries Remain a Credible Libraries Remain a Credible Resource in 21Resource in 21stst Century Century
Note. Digital Library Federation and Council on Library and InformationResources. (2002). Dimensions and Use of the Scholarly Information Environment.
98% agree with statement98% agree with statement, “My … library , “My … library contains information from credible and contains information from credible and known sources.”known sources.”
It ain’t your grandmother’s library…any more
• Speed of change no longer incremental
• Rate of change is transformational
Changing BehaviorsChanging Behaviors
• Anecdotal indicators• Operational evidence• Research information
“…everyone in class tried to get those articles on line and some people didn’t even bother to to to the stacks when theycouldn’t Google them.” Graduate Student NYT Online 6/21/04 (Katie Hafner, “Old search engine in the
the library tries to fit into a Google world”)
Reference DecreaseReference Decrease
Note. M. Kyrillidou and M. Young. (2002).ARL Statistics 2000-01. Washington, D.C.: ARL, p.7.
Searches for Online JournalsSearches for Online JournalsUT Austin Libraries 2002-2004 MonthlyUT Austin Libraries 2002-2004 Monthly
0
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
Total File Requests - UT Austin Libraries Total File Requests - UT Austin Libraries 2000-20032000-2003
0
100,000,000
200,000,000
300,000,000
400,000,000
500,000,000
600,000,000
700,000,000
800,000,000
900,000,000
2000 2001 2002 2003
Total Hits
Changing BehaviorsChanging Behaviors
Note. Digital Library Federation and Council on Library and InformationResources. (2002). Dimensions and Use of the Scholarly Information Environment.
Recent Survey:Recent Survey:Only Only 15.7% agreed with the statement15.7% agreed with the statement “The “The Internet has not changed the way I use the Internet has not changed the way I use the library.”library.”
Faculty: Dependence on Electronic Resources
Will Increase
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
2000 2003
Not WellSomewhatVery Well
“I will become increasingly dependent on electronic research resources in the future.”
http://www.arl.org/arl/proceedings/144/guthrie_files/guthrie.ppt
Research Behavior: Research Behavior: Personal ControlPersonal Control
When searching for When searching for printprint journals for journals for research:research:
Note. Digital Library Federation and Council on Library and InformationResources. (2002). Dimensions and Use of the Scholarly Information Environment.
• Only 13.9% ask a librarian for assistanceOnly 13.9% ask a librarian for assistance• Only 3.2% consider consulting a librarian a preferred Only 3.2% consider consulting a librarian a preferred way of identifying informationway of identifying information
LibQUAL+: Reasons for being
• To answer necessity for assessment
• To detect rapid shifts in information-seeking behavior
• To facilitate reallocation of resources from traditional services and functions
Peer Assessment
• University of Texas Libraries compares favorably to peers
• University of Washington
• University of Wisconsin – Madison
• UCLA
• Ohio State University
• University of Minnesota – Twin Cities
LibQUAL+™
Adequacy GapThe difference between the minimum and perceived score
Information Control scores. UT had…higher perceived scores than did the peer group. UT had a larger adequacy gap and a significantly smaller superiority gap than did the peer groups.
Constituent Groups
• What are the differences we can recognize by constituent group?– Undergraduate– Graduate Students– Faculty– Library Staff
Constituent Groups
• What are the differences we can recognize by constituent group?– Undergraduate– Graduate Students– Faculty– Library Staff
Consider Discipline Differences
• Are there statistically different behaviors by discipline to which we need to respond?
Humanities (N = 103)Humanities had significantly lower perceived scores for Library as Place(Humanities = 6.15; other UT = 6.565). The adequacy gap for Affect of Service was marginally higher(Humanities = 1.089; other UT = 0.778).
Engineering & Computer Science (N = 112)Respondents from Engineering and Computer Science had significantly lower minimum(E & CS = 5.771; other UT = 6.230) standards for Affect of Service and Information Control (E & CS = 6.462;other UT = 6.742). The perceived rating for Information Control was also significantly lower (E & CS = 7.979;other UT = 8.188). The adequacy gap was significantly larger for Affect of Service (E & CS = 1.197; other UT = 0.757) and overall (E & CS = 0.939; other UT = 0.607).
What next?
… the Library Summit
Clemson University Libraries Clemson UniversityClemson University Libraries Clemson University
The Clemson Summit Concept
Concept initiated by President
Summits are organized around a university function
Bring university constituents together to focus on one area
Take the leap!
Why hold a Library Summit?
Discuss current state of library service quality
Generate fresh ideas for change and improvement from the University community
Gather qualitative data for strategic planning process from external constituents
Allowed me as a new Vice Provost to strategically engage the entire academic community
Summit OverviewModeled after Clemson University Libraries Summit
Invited representatives from campus community
President Faulkner opened the Summit
Major opinion makers, critics
Participant information packet
Summit Overview, cont’d
Facilitated roundtable discussions focused on service quality dimensions
How to improve where service quality is currently below users’ expectations or deteriorating over time
Focus on “how to” not “can’t do”
Summit Agenda9:00 – 10:00 AM Introductory Remarks (Dr. Faulkner)
Purpose of Summit(Dr. Heath)
Brief Introduction to LibQUAL+
Expected Outcomes
10:00 – 11:00 AM Roundtable #1
11:00 – noon Roundtable #2
noon – 1:00 PM Lunch
Statistical analysis
Focus group facilitators
Participants
Invitations and information packet
Event coordination
Survey comments
Adequacy Gaps
Community feedback
Summit Checklist
Roundtable DiscussionsDiscussions organized around LibQUAL+ dimensions
Choose different topic for each session
Innovative and constructive solutions from your perspective
Negative gaps & “danger zones”
Focus on “how to” not “can’t do”
Facilitator & library staff roles
Analyze and sort focus group data
Items assigned to appropriate AD for implementation
Timelines set and posted to web site
Communicate changes to University community on ongoing basis
After the Summit
Service Quality Assessment and Improvement Site
http://www.lib.utexas.edu/vprovost/assessment/index.html
LibQUAL+ results and analyses
Library Summit info and focus group data
Improvement projects and timetables
Service Quality Assessment and Improvement Site
http://www.lib.utexas.edu/vprovost/assessment/index.html
LibQUAL+ results and analyses
Library Summit info and focus group data
Improvement projects and timetables
Coffee bar in both PCL and UGL
The library to more actively enforce cell phone and noise policies
Fewer and more clearly defined service points in PCL and UGL
More couches and comfortable chairs in all library facilities
Ubiquitous wireless access in all library facilities; more power
Longer business hours in a number of library facilities
Better photocopiers with additional functionality
Both quiet spaces and areas where you can talk and work in groups
Major Themes: Library as Place
Library staff to be friendly, courteous and approachable
The library to better market services to the University community
Better access to subject specialists
Library staff to be more proactive, to “roam” the library looking for opportunities to help users and to more actively promote services to faculty and departments
Major Themes: Affect of Service
More services and notifications accessible online through the library web site, UT Direct and email
The library web site and UTNetCAT to function more like Google and Amazon.com with additional personalization, seamless linking and alert services
Well-designed, easy-to-use searching and help interfaces on the library web site and UTNetCAT
More accessible instruction in how to use library resources both online and in-person
Books and other materials to be delivered to campus addresses
Major Themes: Personal Control
SFX & MetaLib
Providing “negative” information from LIBQUAL+ results was very positive (Psychology: “disconfirming expectancy”
An organization that makes its weaknesses public and asks for advice gains positive regard
Participants tend to take ownership of their ideas
Input from Summit participants provides richer and more detailed data for management decision making
What we learned
Alternate years between community and staff library summits
Focus on middle managers and supervisors
Reinforce “holistic” idea of customer service and the need for constant improvement
Gain valuable feedback from staff about improving services
Next step… Staff Library Summit
Trends: Trends: Access to InformationAccess to Information by Status by StatusFaculty
DesMinPer
AI
5.0
5.5
6.0
6.5
7.0
7.5
8.0
8.5
9.0
Year
2001 2002 2003
Graduate
DesMinPer
AI
5.0
5.5
6.0
6.5
7.0
7.5
8.0
8.5
9.0
Year
2001 2002 2003
Undergrad
DesMinPer
AI
5.0
5.5
6.0
6.5
7.0
7.5
8.0
8.5
9.0
Year
2001 2002 2003
Total
DesMinPer
AI
5.0
5.5
6.0
6.5
7.0
7.5
8.0
8.5
9.0
Year
2001 2002 2003
Alignment of values
• Can we be sure that our priorities, values correctly align with those of our constituents?
• If a case for misalignment can be made, what can we do to align ourselves more effectively?
ARL Means
5.00
5.50
6.00
6.50
7.00
7.50
8.00
IC1
IC2
IC3
IC4
IC5
IC6
IC7
IC8
AS1
AS2
AS3
AS4
AS5
AS6
AS7
AS8
AS9
LP1
LP2
LP3
LP4
LP5
LibQUAL+ Questions
Minimum Mean
Perceived Mean
- 30 -
