User Knowledge Management – How University Libraries Analyse User Needs and Develop Services

The demands on library services are quickly changing in a continually updating digital age. This increases the importance of a good understanding of the needs and demands of the users. In order to sample and follow the change in user needs library organisations analyse their efforts using a series of different methods. In a recent survey distributed to all 301 European LIBER university libraries, we asked questions pertaining to methods for quality development, particularly implementation of general user surveys (GUS). Among the 127 answering libraries (42%) we analysed how library services can be developed via a user-centred approach. In general, libraries engaged in explorative methods, such as UX techniques or process mapping, displayed an increased understanding of what the users find as library strengths. On the other hand libraries using primarily reporting tools such as balanced scorecard showed little or no such effect. The library strengths most valued by users in the study were in the areas of the physical library, researcher support - especially in the area of scholarly communication - and information literacy tuition. Several answers indicate that user feedback has helped build institutional profile and image. The results also give an indication of how general user surveys can best be used. Appropriate follow-up after the survey is important in gaining usable results. The key step was the production of a written report, which resulted in a nearly 50% increased chance of obtaining changes in services. Most libraries developed their own surveys for the effort. Services most commonly changed after performing a GUS were in the areas of the physical library, followed by communication/marketing and information literacy tuition. A GUS most often leads to a number of minor service improvements rather than large strategic shifts. This work was commissioned and supported by the former LIBER Working Group on Research and Education

General User Surveys and Other Methods for Quality Assessment – User Knowledge and Evidence-Based Library Development

Aim A key component of library management is meeting the needs of our users. This requires continuous analysis of user experience followed by library development. The aim of this study was to better understand the use and effect of general user surveys (GUS) and other methods of gathering user input for quality assessment and improvement of library activities. Methods Data collection was done via surveys, which were sent out to the library directors of all 308 European LIBER university libraries. The response rate was 42%. After survey collection the free-text answers were coded and categorised and then the results were analysed. Results A majority of the responding libraries (77%) have performed a GUS during the last four years. Of these libraries, 54% reported changes to services based on the surveys. The most common method of obtaining user input was by placing a digital “user suggestion box” on the library website. The next most common method entailed using systematic processes to ensure continuous quality improvements. Discussion/conclusion Nearly half of libraries develop their own survey instruments. Appropriate follow-up after the survey was important in order to assure library development. The key step was producing a written report, which increased success in changes to services by nearly 50%. Changes were observed in all traditional library areas, with most changes reported for the areas of physical library standard, communication/marketing and quality of information literacy education. The changes implemented were typically small steps leading to substantial improvements, rather than larger strategic shifts. Small libraries have limited resources and difficulty arranging large user surveys. They reported higher usage of methods performed in the physical library. The library strengths most valued by users were in the areas of the physical library, researcher support- especially in the area of scholarly communication- and information literacy education. User feedback helps build institutional profile and image. Analysis of the different methods revealed information regarding which methods give the best understanding of the users

Understanding Library Users via Surveys and Other Methods—Best Practices for Evidence-Based Library Development

A survey was performed over all university libraries within the Association of European Research Libraries (LIBER) in order to study how different methods of user input are utilized. Libraries using analysis based on explorative methods—such as UX and process mapping—report significantly increased user knowledge and perceived well-function. Over three-fourths of the respondents reported performing general user surveys. Surveys offer ease of collection, effectively gather researcher user group input and generate data suitable for communicating library value to stakeholders. However, it is resource-demanding to transfer findings into service changes, especially for smaller libraries, and results often support stepwise improvements rather than discovery of new services

General User Surveys in Quality Development – Discovering Best Practices in Library Services

In 2015, LIBER commissioned the “Working group on Research and Education”. The goal was to collect best practices in library support to both education and research, in part by examining user survey data. As a first step the group started a European LibQUAL consortium, which was evaluated in 2016. As a second step, a survey sent to all 301 European LIBER university libraries asking questions pertaining to the use of general user surveys (GUS) and other methods aimed at improving library quality. The collated result from the 127 answering libraries (42%) gave a good indication of current best practises in library development. A majority of the libraries (77%) have performed a GUS during the period 2013-2016. A key focus of our study was on the library service improvements made as a result of GUS feedback. Responses related to different activity areas were broken down into more than 400 fragments which were coded, categorized and analyzed. The fragments depict numerous small steps that lead to substantial improvements, with the largest activities in the areas of physical library standard, communication/marketing and quality of the information literacy tuition. The GUS appears to be used most to justify minor development steps, rather than large strategic shifts. Our survey results also indicate how GUS are best performed. While small libraries have limited resources for these types of analyses, our results indicate they more successfully employ other in-the-physical-library methods of information gathering regarding user needs. Nearly half of the libraries develop their own survey instruments. Appropriate follow-up after the survey is important for showing a usable result. The key step is producing a written report, which increased the success in attaining changes to services by nearly 50%. Other quality development methods and general library strengths were also analysed. The most common method is placing a digital “user suggestion box” on the library website, followed by systematic processes to ensure continuous quality improvements. The library strengths most valued by users were in the areas of the physical library, researcher support- especially in the area of scholarly communication- and information literacy tuition. User feedback helps build institutional profile and image. In the presentation, we will give further examples of how the libraries define their strengths in different activity areas, in response to user input

Research Library Statistics: For Whom and for What Purpose? The Statistics Users' Views and Wishes

The paper reports a project conducted within the framework of the National Library of Sweden's Expert Group on Library Statistics. The project is financed by the National Library of Sweden, and it aims to capture how library managements make use of the current library statistics (based on the ISO-standard) in the decision-making process. Questions are also asked about the quality and usefulness of the existing statistical data, whether data covers all relevant aspects of library activity, and what additional data is required in order to enhance the validity of collected statistics. The primary method used is semi-structured group interviews (focus groups). Four such interviews were held with the participation of 15 library directors from academic and other research or special libraries from different parts of Sweden. The results show that there is considerable ambivalence among the informants concerning the usefulness of current statistics. On the one hand there is severe criticism of what today is reported on a national level (too much and too little), on the other hand statistical data is used locally to underpin arguments supporting library activities. Stakeholders representing university or institutional management were not available for group interviews. With the support of the interviewed library directors a group of 12 vice-chancellors or other senior managers were identified and approached with a mail survey. Questions were asked about what kind of documentation of library activities they use or prefer, be they quantitative, qualitative or of other kind