Using the LibQUAL+ Survey to Assess User Perceptions of Collections and Service Quality

Service Quality Assessment in University Libraries of Pakistan/L’évaluation de la qualité de service dans les bibliothèques universitaires du Pakistan

“…All three dimensions had high negative superiority gaps, but the IC dimension had the largest negative gap and the LP dimension had the lowest negative gap. These results were not surprising and are in line with the existing literature (Lippincott and Kyrillidou 2004;Arshad 2009;Jankowska, Hertel and Young 2006;Kayongo and Jones 2008;Kemp 2002;Lock and Town 2005;Ahmed and Shoeb 2009;Moon 2007;Hitchingham and Kenney 2002;Peterson et al 2004;Cook et al 2008) that highlighted that users' desired expectations were not met. The other possible reasons may be lack of resources (e.g., material, IT infrastructure, easy access, and modern equipment); poor skills, knowledge, and attitude of library staff; non-availability of Web-based services; training of users and staff in information retrieval; and imbalanced, outdated, and inadequate collections.…”

“…This result is somewhat surprising because most studies (Cook et al 2008(Cook et al , 2009Cook et al 2010;Hiller 2004;Hubbard and Walter 2005;Jaggars, Jaggars, and Duffy 2009;Lessin 2004;Nimsomboon and Nagata 2003;Shedlock and Walton 2004;Wilson 2004) found that the IC dimension was within the ZOT. Only a few studies (Association of Research Libraries 2011; Kemp 2002;Kyrillidou and Persson 2006;Lock and Town 2005) found that the IC dimension was below the ZOT. The major reasons for poor service quality in the university libraries in Pakistan are lack of modern equipment (computer, scanners, photocopy, multimedia, etc.…”

“…The review of literature (Cook et al 2008(Cook et al , 2009Cook et al 2010;Hiller 2004;Hubbard and Walter 2005;Jaggars, Jaggars, and Duffy 2009;Lessin 2004;Nimsomboon and Nagata 2003;Shedlock and Walton 2004;Wilson 2004) reveals that libraries were meeting users' minimum requirements and users were satisfied overall with staff, collection, access, physical facilities, environment, and study-space related services, and all dimensions were within the ZOT. However, a few studies (Ahmed and Shoeb 2009;Association of Research Libraries 2011;Kemp 2002;Kyrillidou and Persson 2006;Lock and Town 2005) indicate users' minimum requirements were not met in specific IC dimension questions and the overall IC dimension.…”