What is the key to library user satisfaction? Can LibQUAL+® help in the quest for delivering a quality library service? The purpose of this paper is to present international research into library customer satisfaction as measured by the LibQUAL+® survey methodology. Commonalities of satisfaction and dissatisfaction have been identified which influence the customers overall view of the library. This knowledge can be used to further increase customer satisfaction through targeting these areas for service improvement.

1. Using LibQUAL+® to Identify
Commonalities in
Customer Satisfaction:
The Secret to Success?
Selena Killick
Cranfield University
Anne van Weerden
Utrecht University

2. LibQUAL+
Internationally Renown
Web based
Standardised
Expectations & Perceptions
LibQUAL+®

3. Adequacy and Superiority
Adequacy:
Calculated by subtracting Minimum from Perceived score.
A negative score indicates failing to meet minimum
expectations.
Superiority:
Calculated by subtracting Desired from Perceived score.
A positive score indicates exceeding desired expectations.
Question 1
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Adequacy Superiority
Minimum Desired Perceived

4. Dimensions
Affect of Service
Empathy
Responsiveness
Assurance
Reliability
Information Control
Scope of Content
Convenience
Ease of Navigation
Timeliness
Equipment
Self-Reliance
Library as Place
Utilitarian Space
Symbol
Refuge

5. LibQUAL+ Radar Chart

6. Commonalities in Satisfaction?
Information Control Library as Place Affect of Service
? ?
?
?
?
?

7. Commonalities in Dissatisfaction?
Information Control Library as Place Affect of Service
? ?
?
? ?
?

8. Sample Group
Utrecht University, Netherlands
 n = 1,851 (long)
Leiden University, Netherlands
 n = 3,761 (lite)
SCONUL Consortium
 17 Higher Education Institutions from the UK
and Ireland
 n = 28,208 (lite/long)
All surveys conducted Jan-Dec 2012

9. Methodology

10. Starting with
the combined
data 2012:
SCONUL,
n = 28208 (mixed)
Leiden University
n = 3761 (lite)
Utrecht University
n = 1851 (long)
ntot = 33820

11. We removed 5717
responses, from
library staff,
and
everyone with
inversions anywhere
This resulted in a
larger bandwith
ntemp = 28103

12. We also removed
1057 surveys
without any answer
in one of the
sections,
not knowing what
the respondent
might have said
about this section
in connection with
the other
two sections
nused = 27046 = 80%

13. Definitions of satisfied/dissatisfied

14. Neither satisfied
nor dissatisfied
Someone with an average score of
5,2 6,3 7,4
is just .....ok
min des
perc

15. Satisfied
Someone with an average score of
6,0 6,2 6,1
can hardly be called satisfied
What we looked for is
min des
perc

16. Satisfied
Superiority gap > 0
<more than 0>
des______________perc
perceiving even more than desired
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Adequacy gap > 1
<more than 1>
min______________perc
perceiving clearly more than minimum

17. Dissatisfied
Someone with an average score of
5,1 5,0 5,2
can hardly be called dissatisfied
What we looked for is
min des
perc xxxxxxxxx

18. Dissatisfied
Adequacy gap < 0
<more than 0>
perc______________min
percieving even less than minimum
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Superiority gap < -1
perc______________<more than 1>
des
percieving clearly less than desired

19. Definitions of satisfied/dissatisfied
Satisfied
Superiority gap > 0
Adequacy gap > 1
Dissatisfied
Adequacy gap < 0
Superiority gap < -1

20. Outcomes

23. Selecting for
Positive AS
scores
Adequacy
gap > 0
Superiority
gap > 1
n = 4135

24. Selecting for
Positive LP
scores
Adequacy
gap > 0
Superiority
gap > 1
n = 3151

25. Selecting for
Positive IC
scores
Adequacy
gap > 0
Superiority
gap > 1
n = 2171

26. Selecting for
Negative LP
scores
Adequacy
gap < 0
Superiority
gap < -1
n = 7367

27. Selecting for
Negative IC
scores
Adequacy
gap < 0
Superiority
gap < -1
n = 6525

28. Selecting for
Negative AS
scores
Adequacy
gap < 0
Superiority
gap < -1
n = 3531

29. It can be seen
that the desired
scores of this
group are the
highest of all
Interpreting these
scores, they are
likely the most
demanding group,
asking a lot from
the personnel

30. Next, we wanted to know what the
differences were between the
Average Respondents (All)
and the various roles,
Students (Undergraduates)
Postgraduates
Staff
Academic staff (Faculty)

31. We expected to find different outcomes for
faculty and students,
such as
students have a lot to ask,
faculty just want their literature quickly

32. Surprisingly,
the outcomes
are always
almost the same

33. All
pos / neg IC
pos / neg LP
pos / neg AS

34. Students
pos / neg IC
pos / neg LP
pos / neg AS

35. Postgrads
pos / neg IC
pos / neg LP
pos / neg AS

36. Staff
pos / neg IC
pos / neg LP
pos / neg AS

37. Faculty
pos / neg IC
pos / neg LP
pos / neg AS

38. For certainty....,
or just
amazing:

39. All

40. Students

41. Post-graduates

42. Staff

43. Faculty

44. Some statistics
to see if our claims
are significant

45. Made with Statistica
Group -1 =
not meeting
selected criteria:
libstaff, inversions,
# answers/dim ≠ 3
Group 0 =
intermediate
IC = red
LP = green
AS = blue
Group 1 = dissatisfied: Group 2 = satisfied:
adq gap < 0 xxsup gap > 0
sup gap < -1 xxadq gap > 1

46. -1 = excluded, 0 = neutral
-1 = negative, 2 = positive
IC = red
LP = green AS = blue

47. Conclusions

48. Conclusions
Statistically significant correlations:
 Satisfaction with Information Control &
satisfaction overall
 Dissatisfaction with Affect of Service &
dissatisfaction overall
Dissatisfied respondents are also the most
demanding
Correlation ≠ Causation

53. Thank You.
Selena Killick
Cranfield University
s.a.killick@cranfield.ac.uk
Anne van Weerden
Utrecht University
a.vanweerden@uu.nl