Measuring Library Service Quality

1. LibQUAL+LibQUAL+®®
Survey IntroductionSurvey Introduction
Presented by:
Martha Kyrillidou, Association of Research Libraries
Stephen Town, University of York
Colleen Cook, McGill University
Jacqui Dowd, Glasgow University
www.libqual.org
Northumbria International Conference
Edinburgh, Scotland
July 20, 2015

2. Project web site: http://www.libqual.org
““22 Items and22 Items and a Boxa Box””

3. www.libqual.org
Association of Research Libraries
Steering CommitteeSteering Committee
 Colleen Cook, McGill
 Stephen Town, U of York
 Bruce Thompson, Texas A&M University
 Martha Kyrillidou, ARL
 Elliott Shore, ARL Executive Director
 Jacqui Dowd, Glasgow University, UK/EU expert
 LIBER consortium
 ARL staff: Gary Roebuck, Amy Yeager, Henry Gross

4. www.libqual.org
Association of Research Libraries
ARL RolesARL Roles

5. www.libqual.org
Association of Research Libraries
ARL AssessmentARL Assessment
…To describe and measure the performance of
research libraries and their
contributionto
teaching, research,
scholarshipand community
service …

6. Premises
Three Seminal Quotations

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

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

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

10. 13 Libraries
English LibQUAL+™ Version
4000 Respondents
QUAL
QUAN
QUAL
QUAL
QUAN
QUAL
PURPOSE DATA ANALYSIS PRODUCT/RESULT
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
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
Vignette
Re-tooling
Iterative
Emergent
2000
2004 ….
315 Libraries English, Dutch, Swedish,
German LibQUAL+™ Versions
160,000 anticipated respondents
LibQUAL+LibQUAL+™ Project™ Project
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

11.  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
76 Interviews Conducted76 Interviews Conducted

12. LoadedPT:P1:01xxxxxxxxxxxxxx.txt,S:AdminColleenServQual InterviewsTEXT Only01xxxxxxxxx.txt (redirected: c:zzatlastifred

14. Dimensions ofDimensions of
Library Service QualityLibrary Service Quality
Empathy
Ubiquity and Ease
of Access
Comprehensive
Collections
Reliability
Responsiveness
Symbol
Utilitarian space
Assurance
Formats
Timely access to
resources
Physical location
Self-reliance Library as Place
Library
Service
Quality
Model 1
?
Refuge
Affect of Service

15. “You put a search on a book and it’s just gone;
it’s not reacquired. … There’s more of a
problem of lost books, of books that are
gone and nobody knows why and nobody’s
doing anything about it.”
Faculty member
ReliabilityReliability

16. “I want to be treated with respect. I want you
to be courteous, to look like you know what
you are doing and enjoy what you are
doing. … Don’t get into personal
conversations when I am at the desk.”
Faculty member
Affect of ServiceAffect of Service

17. “By habit, I usually try to be self-sufficient.
And I’ve found that I am actually fairly
proficient. I usually find what I’m looking
for eventually. So I personally tend to ask a
librarian only as a last resort.”
Graduate student
Self-relianceSelf-reliance

18. www.libqual.org
Survey StructureSurvey Structure
(Detail View)(Detail View)

19. 13 Libraries
English LibQUAL+™ Version
4000 Respondents
QUAL
QUAN
QUAL
QUAL
QUAN
QUAL
PURPOSE DATA ANALYSIS PRODUCT/RESULT
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
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
Vignette
Re-tooling
Iterative
Emergent
2000
2004 ….
315 Libraries English, Dutch, Swedish,
German LibQUAL+™ Versions
160,000 anticipated respondents
LibQUAL+LibQUAL+™ Project™ Project
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

20. alpha By Language
By Language
Service Info. Lib as
Group n Affect Control Place TOTAL
American (all) 59,318 .95 .91 .88 .96
British (all) 6,773 .93 .87 .81 .94
French (all) 172 .95 .90 .89 .95

21. alpha by University Type
By University Type
Service Info. Lib as
Group n Affect Control Place TOTAL
Comm Colleges 4,189 .96 .92 .89 .97
4 yr Not ARL 36,430 .95 .91 .88 .96
4 yr, ARL 14,080 .95 .90 .87 .96
Acad Health 3,263 .95 .92 .90 .96

22. alphas for 2006 Scores
A Key Resource:
“How You Can… Integrity…
Service Quality…”
--Virginia 2006 Assessment Conference and
Performance Measurement and Metrics

23. Service Affect (n = 71,170 English)
SA20APER .80541 .22199 .27521
SA07APER .80338 .27236 .20993
SA17APER .79655 .20844 .22793
SA04APER .77062 .29258 .17694
SA15APER .73437 .34646 .24299
SA23APER .73391 .34359 .27896
SA01APER .71589 .29773 .16972
SA12APER .71541 .32229 .25528
SA10APER .68825 .35941 .28090
Service Affect

24. Library as Place
Library as Place (n = 71,170 English)
LP13APER .26213 .25710 .80013
LP05APER .20412 .15920 .73601
LP09APER .27765 .24869 .72631
LP24APER .26672 .34873 .72148
LP19APER .19630 .28102 .70295

25. Information Control
Information Control (n = 71,170 English)
IA18APER .29824 .73480 .28164
PC11APER .29045 .71111 .19999
IA03APER .24482 .70341 .18989
PC25APER .21770 .68760 .22736
PC21APER .41572 .65615 .30096
PC02APER .37847 .63860 .16559
PC16APER .33439 .61598 .36448
IA14APER .28759 .58521 .39295

26. 13 Libraries
English LibQUAL+™ Version
4000 Respondents
QUAL
QUAN
QUAL
QUAL
QUAN
QUAL
PURPOSE DATA ANALYSIS PRODUCT/RESULT
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
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
Vignette
Re-tooling
Iterative
Emergent
2000
2004 ….
315 Libraries English, Dutch, Swedish,
German LibQUAL+™ Versions
160,000 anticipated respondents
LibQUAL+LibQUAL+™ Project™ Project
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

27. www.libqual.org
DimensionsDimensions
2000 2001 2002 2003-Present
41 items 56 items 25 items 22 items
Affect of Service Affect of Service Affect of Service Affect of Service
Library as Place Library as Place Library as Place Library as Place
Reliability Reliability Personal Control
Information
Control
Provision of
Physical
Collections
Self-Reliance
Information
Access
Access to
Information
Access to
Information

28. Some Measurement
Integrity Evidence
Empathy
Information
Control
Responsiveness
Symbol
Utilitarian space
Assurance
Scope of Content
Ease of Navigation
Self-Reliance
Library as Place
Library
Service
Quality
Model 3
Refuge
Affect of Service
Reliability
Convenience
Timeliness
Equipment

29. “22 Items and The Box….”
Why the Box is so Important
– 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.

30. “…and Five Ancillary Items”
Either Zero or Five Ancillary items are
selected to address local or consortial
concerns
–Items from the initial LibQUAL+TM
item
pool.
–Items written by previous consortial
groups.

31. LibQUAL+ Lite RCT
LibQUAL+ Lite is a survey methodology in
which (a) all users answer a few, selected
survey questions, but (b) the remaining
survey questions are answered ONLY by
a randomly-selected subsample of the
users. Data are collected on all questions,
but each user answers fewer questions,
thus shortening the required response
time.

33. Core Items – Long version

34. Core Items – Lite version

35. Comparison Table
LibQUAL+® Lite LibQUAL+®
Core Questions
IC10 AS01 Employees who instill confidence in users
LP03 IC02 Making electronic resources accessible from my home or office
AS13 LP03 Library space that inspires study and learning
IC(random) AS04 Giving users individual attention
AS(random) IC05 A library Web site enabling me to locate information on my own
IC(random) AS06 Employees who are consistently courteous
LP(random) IC07 The printed library materials I need for my work
AS(random) LP08 Quiet space for individual activities
AS09 Readiness to respond to users’ questions
IC10 The electronic information resources I need
AS11 Employees who have the knowledge to answer user questions
LP12 A comfortable and inviting location
AS13 Employees who deal with users in a caring fashion
IC14 Modern equipment that lets me easily access needed information
AS15 Employees who understand the needs of their users
IC16 Easy-to-use access tools that allow me to find things on my own
LP17 A getaway for study, learning or research
AS18 Willingness to help users
IC19 Making information easily accessible for independent use
IC20 Print and/or electronic journal collections I require for my work
LP21 Community space for group learning and group study
AS22 Dependability in handling users’ service problems

36. LibQUAL+®
• ‘total market survey’ available to libraries
through a standardized web protocol; it
measures service quality from the user’s
perspective and allows libraries to
understand performance (a) within the
context of users’ expectations (zone of
tolerance), (b) longitudinally, and (c) in
relation to peer institutions
• It has been implemented in multiple
institutions, languages and countries since
2000

37. www.libqual.org
Three interpretation frameworks
• Zone of tolerance
– Perceptions vs. expectations
– meeting users minimum expectations
– Approaching users’ desired expectations
• My scores over time (longitudinal)
– Am I doing better or worse compared to last
time I measured my performance
• Peer comparisons

38. www.libqual.org
Association of Research Libraries

39. www.libqual.org
WorldWorld LibQUALLibQUAL++®®
SurveySurvey

40. LibQUAL+LibQUAL+®®
Exchange of ExperienceExchange of Experience
Presented by:
Martha Kyrillidou, Association of Research Libraries
Stephen Town, University of York
Colleen Cook, McGill University
Jacqui Dowd, Glasgow University
All of you ……
www.libqual.org
Northumbria International Conference
Edinburgh, Scotland
July 20, 2015

41. What’s new …
• Local questions by any library after reviewing
carefully concept
• Customization of user groups (in addition to
disciplines)
• Anonymous and Confidential
• Increasing optional slots from five to seven
• LIBER consortium
• LibQUAL+ South Africa
• LibQUAL+ France
www.libqual.org

42. Not a fad …
• Mixed methods rigorous research coupled
with sound leadership and managerial
strategy delivering real improvements in
library services and … better outcomes!
McGill University – Texas A&M
University of York, UK – Cranfield University,
UK
Glasgow University
All of you and more …
www.libqual.org

43. You …
Ignacio Sanchez University of Pittsburgh
Yan He Indiana University Kokomo
Mariam Elaaz majmaah uinversity
Louise Howard Griffith University
Frédéric Brodkom Universite catholique de Louvain (Belgium)
Anneke Dirkx Leiden University Libraries
Carine Basson North-West University
Janie Lamprecht North-West University
Jennifer Bremner Macquarie University Library
Céline Ervinckx Bibliothèque des sciences et technologies - Université catholique de
Louvain
Jennifer Peasley La Trobe University
Heather Shaw Nottingham Trent University
PAMELA FOREMAN Virginia Union University
Ben Plumpton University of Leeds
Patricia Andersen Colorado School of Mines
www.libqual.org