1 / 22

LibQUAL+ ™ Introduction

LibQUAL+ ™ Introduction. Seattle / London January, 2007 Presented by: Colleen Cook Bruce Thompson. Total Circulation. Note . M. Kyrillidou and M. Young. (2003). ARL Statistics 2002-03. Washington, D.C.: ARL, p.8. Reference Transactions. Note . M. Kyrillidou and M. Young. (2003).

lindadmiller
Download Presentation

LibQUAL+ ™ Introduction

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. LibQUAL+™ Introduction Seattle / London January, 2007 Presented by: Colleen Cook Bruce Thompson

  2. Total Circulation Note. M. Kyrillidou and M. Young. (2003). ARL Statistics 2002-03. Washington, D.C.: ARL, p.8.

  3. Reference Transactions Note. M. Kyrillidou and M. Young. (2003). ARL Statistics 2002-03. Washington, D.C.: ARL, p.8.

  4. Assessment “The difficulty lies in trying to find a single model or set of simple indicators that can be used by different institutions, and that will compare something across large groups that is by definition only locally applicable—i.e., how well a library meets the needs of its institution. Librarians have either made do with oversimplified national data or have undertaken customized local evaluations of effectiveness, but there has not been devised an effective way to link the two.” Sarah Pritchard, Library Trends, 1996

  5. Multiple Methodsof Listening to Customers • Transactional surveys* • Mystery shopping • New, declining, and lost-customer surveys • Focus group interviews • Customer advisory panels • Service reviews • Customer complaint, comment, and inquiry capture • Total market surveys* • Employee field reporting • Employee surveys • Service operating data capture *A SERVQUAL-type instrument is most suitable for these methods Note. A. Parasuraman. The SERVQUAL Model: Its Evolution And Current Status. (2000). Paper presented at ARL Symposium on Measuring Service Quality, Washington, D.C.

  6. Participating Libraries World LibQUAL+™ Survey

  7. Premises Three Seminal Quotations

  8. LibQUAL+™ Premise #1 “….only customers judge quality; all other judgments are essentially irrelevant” PERCEPTIONS SERVICE Note. Zeithaml, Parasuraman, Berry. (1999). Delivering quality service. NY: The Free Press.

  9. LibQUAL+™ Premise #2 “Il est plus nécessaire d'étudier les hommes que les livres” —FRANÇOIS DE LA ROCHEFOUCAULD

  10. LibQUAL+™ Premise #3 “We only care about the things we measure.” --Bruce Thompson, CASLIN, 2006

  11. Reliability Poor Upward Communication Poor Horizontal Communication Poor Tech - Job Fit Perception of Infeasibility Responsiveness Assurance Empathy Tangibles Extended GAPS Model Customers’ Assessment of SQ Organizational Barriers to SQ GAP 1 GAP 2 GAP 5 GAP 3 GAP 4

  12. 13 Libraries English LibQUAL+™ Version 4000 Respondents LibQUAL+™ Project PURPOSEDATAANALYSISPRODUCT/RESULT Emergent Describe library environment; build theory of library service quality from user perspective Test LibQUAL+™ instrument Refine theory of service quality Refine LibQUAL+™ instrument Test LibQUAL+™ instrument Refine theory 2000 Unstructured interviews at 8 ARL institutions Web-delivered survey Unstructured interviews at Health Sciences and the Smithsonian libraries E-mail to survey administrators Web-delivered survey Focus groups Content analysis: (cards & Atlas TI) Reliability/validity analyses: Cronbachs Alpha, factor analysis, SEM, descriptive statistics Content analysis Content analysis Reliability/validity analyses including Cronbachs Alpha, factor analysis, SEM, descriptive statistics Content analysis QUAL QUAN QUAL QUAL QUAN QUAL Case studies1 Valid LibQUAL+™ protocol Scalable process Enhanced understanding of user-centered views of service quality in the library environment2 Cultural perspective3 Refined survey delivery process and theory of service quality4 Refined LibQUAL+™ instrument5 Local contextual understanding of LibQUAL+™ survey responses6 Iterative Vignette Re-tooling 2004 315 Libraries English, Dutch, Swedish, German LibQUAL+™ Versions 160,000 anticipated respondents

  13. “22 items”

  14. Interpreting Service Quality Data Three Interpretation Frameworks

  15. Interpretation Framework #1 Benchmarking Against Peer Institutions --1,000,000 Users; 1,000 Institutions! NORMS! NORMS! NORMS!

  16. Score Norms • Norm Conversion Tables facilitate the interpretation of observed scores using norms created for a large and representative sample. • LibQUAL+™ norms have been created at both the individual and institutional level

  17. Institutional Norms for PerceivedMeans on 25 Core Questions Note: Thompson, B. LibQUAL+ Spring 2002 Selected Norms, (2002).

  18. Interpretation Framework #2 Benchmarking Against Self, Longitudinally “Nobodyis more like me than me!” --Anonymous

  19. Interpretation Framework #3 Interpreting Perceived Scores Against Minimally-Acceptable and Desired Service Levels (i.e., “Zones of Tolerance”)

  20. LibQUAL+™ Resources • LibQUAL+™ Website:http://www.libqual.org • Publications:http://www.libqual.org/publications • Events and Training: http://www.libqual.org/events • Gap Theory/Radargraph Introduction: http://www.libqual.org/Information/Tools/libqualpresentation.cfm • LibQUAL+™ Procedures Manual:http://www.libqual.org/Information/Manual/index.cfm

More Related