ProSeBiCA Development of New Library Services by Means of Conjoint Analysis

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