Assessing outcomes and value: it’s all a matter of perspective

Abstract

If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information. About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.comEmerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation. AbstractPurpose -The purpose of this paper is to explore a wide range of performance measures, while acknowledging that of late, outcome measures have become increasingly important. Several initiatives are underway to develop a broad framework and suggest approaches to developing outcome measures for all types of libraries. However, while outcomes may be increasingly used, determining the value of a specific outcome is complicated by the reality that value is determined by a combination of perspective and each individual experiencing a specific library service. Design/methodology/approach -This paper reviews the literature about outcomes and determining the value of outcomes as a foundation for exploring these two inter-related issuesoutcomes and value. Findings -The findings of a number of reports and studies are reported. Originality/value -Separating the question of identifying the outcomes associated with library services and the value of these outcomes are shaped by the perspective of value and determining value will assist libraries in attempting to measure the impact of the services they provide.

Developing a generic tool to routinely measure the impact of health libraries

“…These qualitative methods are more suited to gaining detailed information regarding specific impacts. Matthews (2015) notes the importance of an outcomes based approach while acknowledging the complication of assessing value from various stakeholder perspectives. Using the International Standard (ISO, 2014) ensured that a range of stakeholders were taken into account when developing the questionnaire.…”

“…Using the International Standard (ISO, ) ensured that a range of stakeholders were taken into account when developing the questionnaire. Matthews () explains how logic models can be used as a framework to understand how libraries contribute to a wide range of outcomes. Figure demonstrates this approach using the concepts and outcomes used in the KfH questionnaire to show how the health library can impact on individuals, services and the wider health organisation.…”

“…Nevertheless, feedback from the pilot and initial roll out of the toolkit suggests that the aim of developing a simple, generic questionnaire that captures outcomes relevant across the stakeholders of all English NHS health libraries has been achieved. Initial testing is positive, and the theories incorporated within it (Saracevic & Kantor, ; Oakleaf, ; Matthews, ) suggest potential wider applicability than the English NHS setting for which it was developed. There is not, as yet, a culture of ongoing assessment within health library services.…”

What is storytime good for and what makes storytime good? A survey of public library directors

“…However, in addition to advocacy efforts, libraries must do a better job of collecting evidence that their efforts are making a difference (Jaeger et al, 2017). Libraries must develop a means of measuring the outcomes of the services and programs they provide (Summers, 1977) while also recognizing that quantitative and narrative data does not necessarily resonate in the same ways for some individuals (Calvert and Goulding, 2015), and that value is determined in multiple ways (Matthews, 2015). Haycock has articulated why the collection and measurement of outcomes and values is so difficult for public libraries: Libraries appear to be unique among service sectors and industries generally in having no commonly agreed upon success factors or indicators.…”

The predicament of library value

“…A good deal of evidence on how the library can best demonstrate its value, especially to users and to the mother institution, has been collected. Studies using ‘return on investment’ or other monetary approaches have been criticized on grounds that library value cannot be quantified purely in monetary figures (Calvert and Goulding, 2015; McMenemy, 2007; Mathews, 2015; Missingham, 2005), while Creaser and Spezi (2012: 6) provide that many of these research results are ‘evidence of activity rather than evidence of value and impact on teaching and research staff’.…”