However, in light of its success certain questions, or issues, must be raised concerning LibQUAL+'s ability to determine academic library effectiveness. These arise from LIBQUAL+ itself as well as from any attempt to evaluate libraries. Answering them reveals strengths-and some weaknesses-inherent in LIBQUAL+.This conceptual paper addresses four questions arising from LibQUAL+'s survey instrument.My hope is that this paper will encourage the general discussion and practice of evaluating libraries The current version of LibQUAL represents a solid contribution to this endeavor but much more remains to be done. ServQUAL/LibQUAL+LibQUAL+ is conceptually based upon SERVQUAL, a controversial but widely-used generic instrument that measures service quality, primarily in business organizations (Asubonteng, Mcleary & Swan 1996;Cullen 2001;Hernon & Nitecki 2001;Kilbourne et. al. 2005;Lassar, Manolis & Winsor 2000;Palmer & O'Neil 2003;Sureshchandar et. al. 2002). Moreover, as it has been developed, LibQUAL+ has been discussed in an extensive "In the SERVQUAL model, quality is defined as 'perceived quality' rather than 'objective quality,' that it is dependent on the customer's perception of what they can expect from a service and what they believe they have received, rather than any objective standard as determined by professional group or in conventional performance measurement" (Cullen, 2001, p. 664). SERVQUAL actually determines service quality by surveying a service's customers as to their perceptions of the service's quality. Similarly, LibQUAL+'s research approach is to survey four categories of library users-undergraduates, graduate students, faculty, and library staff-as to their perceptions regarding service delivery to users by a specific library. For each survey question "gap scores are calculated between minimum and perceived expectations and desired and perceived expectations. The zone of tolerance is the difference between the minimum and desired scores. Optimally, perceived performance assessments should fall comfortably within that zone" (Cook, et. al. 2001, Search for New Measures, p. 106). Ideally "constituents perceptions of service delivery are to float between minimum expectations and the desired or optimum level of service. To score below minimum levels is to fall outside the zone of tolerance and to risk erosion of user confidence and support" (Cook, Heath, & Thompson 2002, p. 22). Functional/Technical Model of Service EffectivenessThe dimensions used in the 2005 LibQUAL+ survey's twenty two core questions cover users' experience of service delivery: its emotional impact (affect) on them, the extent to which service delivery is under users' control, and the extent to which a library place comfortable for research and learning is provided. However, a broader, more inclusive approach for determining service quality, one advocated in this paper, is what Lassar et. al. (2000), drawing upon earlier work by Gronroos (1983), call the "Functional/TechnicalModel of Quality" (p. 246). They argue that "tec...
This paper considers the nature of support in housing as a solution to homelessness and the way in which it has developed across Europe. The paper begins by considering the nature of support in relation to housing and suggests a typology to provide a framework for discussing the relationship between the accommodation and care perspectives involved in supporting a person to live independently in the community. There follows a consideration of the nature of support in housing which examines the different approaches to the provision of support and housing in Europe. This section examines the development and form of provision of support in housing in different welfare systems. This understanding is then employed to identify the nature of the contribution of supported housing to the solution to homelessness. The role is examined in greater detail by examination of the use of supported housing for people with a mental illness.Supported housing, Independent living, European Union, Welfare systems,
No abstract
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.