1 / 28

ProSeBiCA Development of New Library Services by Means of Conjoint Analysis

ProSeBiCA Development of New Library Services by Means of Conjoint Analysis. Antonia Hermelbracht, Bettina Koeper Bielefeld University. Programme. Preamble Service-orientated libraries – what does it really mean?

kina
Download Presentation

ProSeBiCA Development of New Library Services by Means of Conjoint Analysis

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. ProSeBiCADevelopment of New Library Servicesby Means of Conjoint Analysis Antonia Hermelbracht, Bettina Koeper Bielefeld University

  2. Programme • PreambleService-orientated libraries – what does it really mean? • Introducing ProSeBiCA Methodology, objectives and practical implementation, prospects • The empirical surveys at Bielefeld University • The idea generation step • Design and results of the ACA survey (Adaptive Conjoint Analysis) • Design and results of the CBC survey (Choice-Based Conjoint Analysis) • Conclusions

  3. Preamble Service orientation in academic libraries means: • Work must focus on the user. • Service development must be in line with user needs. • User acceptance will form a new (?) and vital criterion for valuation of libraries. Hence it requires: • to establish and improve customer relationship • to create a profound knowledge about user (“customer intelligence”) • to implement appropriate tools for library management

  4. Introducing ProSeBiCA: Methodology Conjoint Analysis = marketing research method • Aiming at:  the analysis of customer preferences on an empirical basis  the simulation of potential decisions on the use of products / services • A proactive method, looking at the future shape of products / services • Widespread in commercial application

  5. Introducing ProSeBiCA: Methodology Technical terms: • Attribute and levela product / service and its potential forms • Service offeringcombined levels of different attributes • A priori segmentationrespondents subdivided according to pre-existing demographic criteria • Benefit segmentationgrouping respondents according to the main benefits they look for in a product / service

  6. Objectives of Project • Adapt Conjoint-Analysis as a tool for the strategic development of academic libraries • Develop an analysis and simulation framework for the whole range of library services • First step: framework for Bielefeld University as testing environment • Second step: general framework for academic libraries, guidelines for application of Conjoint Analysis • Identify future relevant services, give insight what users may expect from their library

  7. General statements and results,guidelines foracademiclibraries Idea generationstep Mar – Aug 2004 ACA survey Bielefeld University Oct – Dec2004 CBC survey Bielefeld University May – June2005 ACA + CBC survey Cottbus University Nov – Dec2005 Practical Implementation • Project funded by German Research Foundation (DFG) • Carried out by Bielefeld University Library and the Chair of Marketing, Department of Economics and Business Administration at Bielefeld University • Milestones:

  8. Prospects Co-operations with Sheridan Libraries of the Johns Hopkins University (JHU) and LibQUAL+TM: • Adapt ProSeBiCA into U.S. library perspective • Integrate techniques offered by CAPM, LibQUAL+TM and ProSeBiCA • Develop a homogenous tool and a portal as decision support system for library management

  9. The idea generation step • Sources of new ideas: • Secondary research(political papers, empirical studies from all over the world, Internet) • Academic library user survey(Seminar on new library service development) • Workshops with scientists and librarians(in Bielefeld, Cottbus and Kansas, USA) • Statistical analysis of library usage data(detection of library usage types by means of NN) • Academic library staff survey(OWL libraries) • List including more than 250 “new” ideas for academic libraries

  10. The idea generation step Example for new service ideas: • Video-mediated book-view • 3D multi-mode search engine • Webcam communication with librarians • Information about the loan account via SMS • Multilingual starter packages for foreign users • Water dispensers in the library rooms • Lockable carrels with extended communication facilities • Personal university user card (multi-function card) • Online publishing portal • …

  11. The idea generation step Classification scheme:

  12. Methodology of the empirical surveys Adaptive Conjoint Analysis: • Dynamical Question Generation • Appropriate for a large amount of attributes and levels • Four question types: • Attribute preference levels • Attribute importance • Paired-comparison trade-off questions • Calibration concepts Choice-Based Conjoint Analysis: • Most used Online-Conjoint-Software • Integrates the choice behavior of the consumers • One question type: Comparisons of complete library profiles

  13. Design of the ACA survey Example: Attribute preference levels

  14. Design of the ACA survey Example: Attribute importance

  15. Design of the ACA survey Example: Paired-comparison trade-off questions

  16. Design of the ACA survey Example: Calibration concepts

  17. Design of the CBC survey Example: CBC choice concept

  18. 125 100 75 Number of responses 50 25 0 2004/10/13 2004/10/15 2004/10/17 2004/10/19 2004/10/21 2004/10/23 2004/10/25 2004/10/27 2004/10/29 2004/10/31 2004/11/02 2004/11/04 2004/11/06 2004/11/08 2004/11/10 2004/11/12 2004/11/14 2004/11/16 2004/11/18 2004/11/20 2004/11/22 2004/11/24 2004/11/26 2004/11/28 2004/11/30 2004/12/02 2004/12/04 2004/12/06 2004/12/08 2004/12/10 ACA survey at Bielefeld University Demographics and additional questions: N = 2122 October 13th - December 10th 2004 • Provision of media (37 levels): N = 579 • Learning and working environment (42 levels): N = 540 • Communication (24 levels): N = 455 • Additional services (15 levels): N = 548

  19. User groups (all) Residents of Bielefeld & OWL(active users) 9303 Administrative staff 832 Scientific assistants 520 Professors 253 Students 19628 0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 User groups (sample) 216 Residents of Bielefeld & OWL Administrative staff 41 Scientific assistants 139 Professors 35 Students 1685 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 ACA survey at Bielefeld University Sample profile:

  20. Sample Students(all) 5% 5% 9% 11% 4% 3% Biology 6% Chemistry 7% 9% 6% History 3% Health Sciences 4% Linguistics 11% 10% Mathematics Education Science 18% Physics Psychology 21% 9% Law 12% Sociology 4% Technology 5% Business Administration 3% 8% 5% 12% 8% 2% ACA survey at Bielefeld University Sample profile: Faculty membership

  21. ACA survey at Bielefeld University Most desirable services: Conventional library catalogue search Self-administration of the loan account On-line post box Increase of the printed media stock Optimized guidance system Upholstered chairs More photocopiers Supported search (performed jointly) Book information MyLibrary – personal profile Loan of “yellow books” (presentation copies) Open-air area Water dispensers Starter package University user card Refereed on-line publishing portal … Least desirable services: Conventional interior design No on-line publishing No on-line search support No search support by librarians No personalization of library services Academic search engine Recommendation system Radio-archive Drive-in book lending Mobile navigation Children’s play area PDA (Personal Digital Assistant) Library induction game Loudspeaker system SMS notification On-line discussion forum …

  22. ACA survey at Bielefeld University

  23. ACA survey at Bielefeld University Benefit segmentation: Cluster analysis (Ward) Provision of media Communication Cluster 1: The involved and innovation-oriented users(N = 184) High usage likelihood Strong differentiation between different services Liking new innovative services Cluster 1: The involved and innovation-oriented users(N = 264) High usage likelihood Liking different new services High importance of core services Cluster 2: The traditional users(N = 138) Rather low usage likelihood Low differentiation between established services Strong differentiation between new services Cluster 2: The less interested users(N = 111) Low usage likelihood Low differentiation between different services Liking some of the new service ideas Cluster 3: The online communication campaigner (N = 103) High usage likelihood Strong differentiation between different services Preference of on-line communication if possible Cluster 3: The determined users(N = 139) High usage likelihood Strong differentiation between different services High importance of core services and some innovations

  24. ACA survey at Bielefeld University Benefit segmentation: Cluster analysis (Ward) Learning environment Additional services Cluster 1: The involved regular users(N = 301) Rather high usage likelihood Comparatively weak differentiation between services Open for innovations Cluster 1: The traditional users(N = 214) Lower usage likelihood than Cluster 2 (but not uninvolved) Strong differentiation between some of the services Preference for the current status and, partly, for optimizations of the core services Cl. 2: The innovation-oriented users(N = 131) High usage likelihood Distinct differences between some of the services Explicit desire for innovations and changes Cluster 2: The innovation-oriented users(N = 288) High usage likelihood Open for innovations and changes Preference for optimizations of the core services as well as for new services Distinct differences between some of the items Cluster 3: The conservative users(N = 29) High usage likelihood Very strong differentiation between some services Strict rejection of some innovative alterations

  25. 150 100 Number of responses 50 0 2005/05/04 2005/05/05 2005/05/06 2005/05/07 2005/05/08 2005/05/09 2005/05/10 2005/05/11 2005/05/12 2005/05/13 2005/05/14 2005/05/15 2005/05/16 2005/05/17 2005/05/18 2005/05/19 2005/05/20 2005/05/21 2005/05/22 2005/05/23 2005/05/24 2005/05/25 2005/05/26 2005/05/27 2005/05/28 2005/05/29 2005/05/30 2005/05/31 2005/06/01 2005/06/02 2005/06/03 2005/06/04 2005/06/05 2005/06/06 2005/06/07 2005/06/08 2005/06/09 2005/06/10 2005/06/11 2005/06/12 2005/06/13 2005/06/14 2005/06/15 2005/06/16 2005/06/17 2005/06/18 2005/06/19 2005/06/20 2005/06/21 2005/06/22 2005/06/23 2005/06/24 2005/06/25 2005/06/26 2005/06/27 2005/06/28 2005/06/29 2005/06/30 CBC survey at Bielefeld University Number of responses: N = 1672 May 04th - June 30th 2005

  26. Reactive innov. strategy PWU= -0,400 Unsupported working TNW= 0,176 No service specialization TNW= 0,140 Specialization in selected areas TNW= 0,455 Assisted working TNW= 0,425 Selective innov. strategy PWU= 0,348 Focus just on top performance services TNW= -0,596 Progressive innov. strategy PWU= 0,052 Task delegation TNW= -0,601 Few services with costs TNW= 0,286 Pragmatic and functional presentation TNW= 0,169 Conventional library TNW= 0,704 Some services with costs TNW= 0,390 Completely digitalized library TNW= -0,704 Entertaining and stimulating presentation TNW= -0,169 Many services with costs TNW= -0.676 CBC survey at Bielefeld University

  27. Conclusions • Large samples covering all relevant user groups • Lively interest / involvement of respondents • Improved understandability of complex questions (due to textual and visual illustrations) • Great importance of the conventional library as well as ofservices on the spot • Willingness to deal with new service ideas • No significant need of a plenty of “extras” • Preference for services that ease the direct and effortlessaccess to information • Partial confirmation the by results at the Brandenburg Technical University of Cottbus

  28. Thank you for your attention! Antonia Hermelbracht ahermelbracht@wiwi.uni-bielefeld.de Tel.: 0521 / 106-4883 Bettina Koeper bettina.koeper@uni-bielefeld.de Tel. 0521 / 106-4057

More Related