Skip to: content

LibQUAL 2010 survey results

LibQUAL

Report of the University of Toronto Libraries, St. George Campus, 2010 LibQUAL+ Service Quality Survey

1. Introduction

In March of 2010, the University of Toronto Libraries participated in the LibQUAL+ survey, as part of a consortium of 47 Canadian libraries, of which 25 are members of the Canadian Association of Research Libraries. The purpose of this report is to summarize and highlight the results of the survey for the St. George Campus Libraries. The libraries at the UTM and UTSC campuses have prepared separate reports of their individual surveys. Included in the report is a brief description of the survey, an account of how the survey was administered, a break-down of respondent demographics, an overall analysis and interpretation of the quantitative survey data, some discussion of the changes from the previous LibQUAL+ survey of 2007, and a follow-up action plan.

2.  Background

LibQUAL+ is a survey developed by the Association of Research Libraries that measures user perceptions and expectations of library service quality in three dimensions:

Affect of Service (AS) – customer services provided by Library staff
Information Control (IC) – library resources, collections, and access to resources
Library as Place (LC) – library spaces, facilities, and amenities (for study, meeting, etc.)
Survey respondents were asked for their judgements on three scales for each survey question: the desired level of service they would like to receive, the minimum they are willing to accept, and the actual level of service they perceive to have been provided (there was also an N/A category for questions that were rated as not applicable to a respondent).  The desired and minimum scores establish the upper and lower boundaries of a zone of tolerance within which the perceived scores should float. Respondents answered 22 core questions and 5 questions specific to the Canadian consortium. The core and consortial questions, as well as questions related to information literacy outcomes and overall service satisfaction, are presented in Appendix A.

Quantitative data collected from respondents for the core service statements were analyzed according to the three dimensions: how the user is treated in the Library (AS), the extent of information and the ability of users to find, use, and manage information on their own (IC), as well as the environment and functionality of the building and its facilities (LP).  In addition, calculations for overall ratings of service satisfaction were recorded. Respondents rated their satisfaction in each area on a scale of 1 to 9 (with 9 as highest).

From the ratings provided by respondents, gaps were calculated to assess the degree to which the Library met the minimum expectations of Library users. A service adequacy gap was calculated by subtracting the minimum from the perceived level of service. A negative service adequacy gap implied a need for improvement in that particular service area. At the other end, a service superiority gap was found by subtracting the desired service rating from the perceived level of service. A positive superiority gap indicated that the Library exceeded expectations for that particular service area.

In addition to the gap scores, the range from the minimum service rating to the desired service rating was also calculated, which is called the Zone of Tolerance. Perceived levels of service should fall within this zone. Results are graphically presented using radar charts. Perceived levels of service that fall outside the zone of tolerance are revealed on the radar charts as bright red areas for negative service adequacy gaps or bright green for service superiority gaps.

3.  Survey Administration

Survey invitations were sent via email to a random sample of approximately 1200 St. George campus undergraduate students, 600 graduate students, 600 faculty members, and 600 staff members. The invitations were sent on March 8, 2010 and several reminder emails were sent, weekly, for the following 3 weeks. The response was 372 completed surveys or roughly 12% of the invited participants.

4.  Respondent Demographics

More significant than the response rate is the degree to which the respondents represent the population of the St. George campus. Figures 1 and 2 illustrate the correspondence between the university’s published data and the way in which the participants identified themselves. Although no data was available about the population sizes of undergraduate year-levels, other than the size of the first-year intake, the undergraduate respondents are fairly evenly divided among the six possible groups. In the graduate population, it appears that more respondents identified themselves as doctoral candidates and less as master’s students than the population statistics indicate.

Figure 1

The university’s population distribution by discipline, with the exception of the social sciences, is quite comparable to the data submitted by the respondents.

The university’s population distribution by discipline, with the exception of the social sciences, is quite comparable to the data submitted by the respondents.

Figure 2

5.  Survey Results Analysis

The results of the LibQUAL+ 2010 survey have provided the Library with some important information about our strengths and weaknesses. Analysis of the data, to date, has provided the following key findings:

Overall:  We are generally exceeding our users’ minimum expectations. As in 2007, there are exceptions to this result, in the area of Information Control. Improvement in the Affect of Service criteria is evident, with a larger percentage of “greater than minimum” scores. Evaluation of Library as Place criteria has remained the same as in 2007. However, when reviewed by user community, considerable differences in evaluation of the 3 dimensions are very evident. (See Figures 3-7)

Affect of Service:  Results from undergraduates revealed no adequacy gaps in this dimension, though their expectations of service were scored lower than graduate students. Graduate students rated courteousness and responsiveness, caring and willingness, as well as dependability, as areas of concern and criticism. Faculty and Staff scores were similar to undergraduates.

Information Control:  Undergraduates indicated no problems with this dimension of service. However, for graduate students and staff (who include post-doctoral fellows) , there were problems with most aspects of these services. It should be noted that, again, graduate students and staff members’ expectations of service in this dimension were scored much higher than that of undergraduates. The only acknowledged area with no problem for graduate students is that of remote access to electronic resources. Faculty and staff results are more comparable to graduate students in this service dimension. Perhaps, the introduction of the Blackboard LMS, between 2007 and 2010, has had a positive impact on undergraduates’ use of library resources, especially in the area of identifying and locating resources easily.

Library as Place:  Undergraduates recorded very high expectations of library spaces and, overall, the results indicate the libraries are meeting these expectations, even if not always “inspiring”. The library spaces are much less important to faculty and staff and no concerns were revealed in the results. However, for graduate students, though expectations are lower than for undergraduates, the libraries are not measuring up in any of the criteria included in this dimension, except for the provision of group learning and study space.

Figure 3  

Overall Results

Figure 4

Undergraduates

Figure 5

Graduate Students

Figure 6

Faculty

Figure 7

University Staff

6. Comments

In addition to responding to a series of questions regarding library service, survey respondents were given the opportunity to provide written comments about their library experience. Read the comments.

7.  Action Plan

Affect of service

 

Information control

 

Library as place

 

Monday - Friday 11am-5pm.