LibQUAL+™. GUGM Reference Section May 19, 2005 Presentation by Brian Mathews, Georgia Tech Caroline Killens, UGA. How to Listen to your Customers Using LibQUAL+™. Definition of Assessment.
GUGM Reference Section
May 19, 2005
Brian Mathews, Georgia Tech
Caroline Killens, UGA
How to Listen to your Customers Using LibQUAL+™
Determine a good source for your campus statistics!
Everyone on campus, random selection, etc.;
If using a random sample, how will you generate your sample? Circulation files, Human Resources files, Registrar’ files, etc.
E-mail, website, mail paper copy
Campus newspapers, website, posters, alert departments, etc.
iPods, no fines, money, sponsored gifts, etc.
Participants are asked to score each question in 3 sub-categories, based on a scale of 1-9:
The sub-categories for each question:
When it comes to….. My minimum service level My perceived service level My desired service low high low high low high
1)Employees who instill confidence users 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
The scores from the 3 sub-categories can be utilized to show the following gaps:
1. ADEQUACY GAP : how well the library is meeting the users’ “minimum” requirements/needs.
Formula: Perceived score minus the minimum score
2. SUPERIORITY GAP : how far the library is from meeting or exceeding the users’ desired level of service
Formula: Perceived score minus the desired score
Radar graphs are a good way to show results of all questions in one chart. This is a good visual way to compare yourself overall with other libraries.
RED – Scores are below your users minimum expectations
BLUE– shows the gap between your minimum and perceived
Yellow – shows the gap between your perceived and desired
GREEN – shows scores above the desired expectations
ARL Colleges & Universities and UGA
Core Questions Summary
Top Engineering Schools
Undergraduates, Perceptions Printed Materials
Top Engineering Schools
Undergraduates, AdequacyKnowledge to Answer User Questions
The survey offers a “comments box” soliciting open-ended user views that provide a more detailed picture of how users view our resources and services
466 UGA participants utilized this box to give 799 specific comments.
231 GT participants utilized this box to give 400 specific comments.
-the difficulty of finding journals online
-too many disparate search engines available
-online tools not user-friendly
-searches that result in few or no hits.
Yes or No?
Here you will find information about all aspects of the survey
This is the assessment site at UGA
This is the LibQUAL+ results and analysis site at GT
Brian Mathews : [email protected]
Caroline Killens : [email protected]