Presentation from a seminar delivered to library managers at University of the Arts, London, 14 February 2013.

1. Data, Performance,
Quality & Value
University of the Arts, London
Thursday 14th February 2013
Happy St Valentine’s Day!

2. PERFORMANCE QUESTIONS
Discussion

3. Ten PM Questions (1)
1. What is performance for you?
2. Who are you accountable to?
3. How do you account to them?
4. How do you balance different accounts?
5. What information is produced to help
manage?

4. Ten Questions (2)
6. Is it helpful?
7. Who are your competitors?
8. How do you demonstrate competitiveness?
9. What about PIs in the digital future?
10. What are you going to do about all this?

5. Summary
• Performance
• Concepts & Frameworks
• Quality
• Value
• A Case: University of York

6. PERFORMANCE AND
MEASUREMENT
Performance

7. What is performance?
“Carrying things through in due form”
Concise Oxford Dictionary

8. PM in the Library Context
‘Qualitative measures are about telling the story of how
good your library is’
‘This cannot be done with anecdotes ... statistics is the
plural of anecdotes’
‘Don’t mistake the finger for the moon’
Zen Saying
Van House, N.

9. Changing context: cross pressures
• Political imperatives & changing values
• Accountability and advocacy to parent institution
• Accountability to customers
• Competition
• Library boundaries, decision support, strategic
change
• Staff measures

10. UK academic approaches to performance
• Quality Assurance
eg Audit, AQE, ISOs
• Traditional patterns of Peer Review
eg RAE/REF, AQE
• Batteries of Performance Indicators
eg HESA, SCONUL, NSS?
• Quality Culture
eg IIP, CSE, LibQUAL+, TQM, NSS?

11. Terminology
• Measurements single measures
• Surrogates indirect measures
• Indicators combined ratios
• Statistics numerical counts
• Evaluation broader
assessment
• Standards defined level
• Targets intended level

12. Before starting ...
• what business are you in?
• what are you trying to achieve?
– objectives
– targets
• within what constraints do you operate?
• how will you judge success?
• how will you be judged on success?
• how is the library structured?
• how is control exercised?
• who are your customers and what do they want?

13. Accountability?
• Personal reporting
• Structural reporting eg Committees
• Published reporting
• Financial accounting
• Library internal
• Wider external

14. FRAMEWORKS
Performance

15. Possible Approaches to PM
• Orr (1973)
• Lancour (1951)
• Cullen (1997)
• Critical Success Factors
• Cost of quality
• Frameworks

16. Some frameworks
• Critical success factors
• The Balanced scorecard
• EFQM
• Quality maturity models
• A Value scorecard

17. Performance indicators arising?
• Orr
– ‘goodness’- activity or impact
• Lancour
– Storehouse/service/educational function
• Cullen
– values (inputs vs outputs)
– focus (internal vs external)
– purpose (weak vs strong resolve)

18. Library as a system
• Library as a physical system
• Library as a collection
• Library as an information gateway
• Library as “adding value” to teaching,
learning, research and …

19. Balancing stakeholders
• Abbott
– three stakeholders
• EQF Business Excellence Model
– Nine assessment criteria
• Balanced Scorecard (Kaplan & Norton)
– Four stakeholder perspectives for strategy

20. Stakeholder differences
• Paymaster Maximum economy
• Library User Maximum effectiveness
• Manager economy, effectiveness,
efficiency in balance

21. Conceptual models (Abbott)
• Simple
Inputs - Outputs - Outcomes
• Complex
Add Environment and Impact

23. EFQM (2003). Introducing Excellence. Brussels: EFQM. Available at:
http://www.efqm.org [Accessed 30 March 2005]
Leadership
People
Processes
Key
Performance
Results
Policy &
Strategy
Partnerships
& Resources
People
Results
Customer
Results
Society
Results
Innovation and Learning
Enablers Results

24. The Balanced Scorecard
• Financial measures for paymasters
• Customer measures for users
• Process measures for managers
• Learning & growth measures (staff?)

25. Balanced Scorecard

27. Financial measures
• Unit costs?
• Expenditure breakdowns?
• Economy measures?
• Market-based measures?
• Performance targets?

28. User Measures?
• Satisfaction surveys
• Designed improvement surveys
• Benchmarking
• Customer care
• ‘Mystery shopper’
• SERVQUAL
• Process times

29. Staff Measures?
• Leadership model and penetration
• Leadership audit
• Departmental indicators
• Staff appraisal & development systems
• Team performance
• Cultural analysis
• Time management; key result areas

30. Data?
Academic:
• SCONUL statistics
• HELMS statistics
• Library MIS
• Local MIS

31. Criteria for PIs
• relevance
• helpfulness
• validity
• reliability
• practicality
• durability?
• comparability?

32. Competitors
Benchmarking
• Process or service?
• Competitors & Partners?
• Measures?
• Collecting & Sharing
• Improving

33. QUALITY
Measures driven by customer expectations

34. Some definitions of Quality
• Customer Focus
• Meeting & exceeding customer
requirements
• Fitness for purpose
• Zero defects
• Culture change
• Continuous improvement

35. Customer Expectations - Quality
‘For all quality management systems customer
satisfaction is the central concern.’
‘only customers judge quality’
‘Service quality is ultimately where the customer
says it is...’
‘Service quality consists of a bundle of
experiences weighted by customer
expectations’

36. TQM Model (Tenner & DeToro)
Customer Focus
Process Improvement
Total Involvement
leading to
Continuous Improvement

37. Customer Focus
• Identify Customers
• Understand Expectations
• Understand Customers
• Benchmarking

38. Process Improvement
• Key Processes
• Steps to Performance Improvement
• Measure Performance

39. Quality Chain
Quality is a continuous process that can be broken
anywhere in the chain of :
acquisition-organisation-dissemination
By making people aware of how their actions help or
hinder the goal of satisfying customer requirements,
quality library services motivate their employees and
suppliers to deliver quality consistently

40. Total Involvement
• Leadership
• Empowered Workforce
• Supplier Quality

41. Zeithaml, Parasuraman & Berry
Service Quality is different to Product Quality:
• Heterogeneous
• More difficult to measure
• Only customers judge quality

42. 5 Dimensions - SERVQUAL factors
Tangibles
Reliability
Responsiveness
Assurance - trust and confidence
Empathy - caring and individualised attention

43. Service Gaps
• Not knowing what the customer wants
• Knowing but not designing the service to
provide it
• Not delivering what’s designed
• Not matching the communication to the
service

44. TQM: Tenner & DeToro
• Faster
• Better
• Cheaper

45. Bill Gates
• Firmness
• Commodity
• Delight

46. Kano Map
• Basis
• Performance
• Surprise

47. Capability Maturity Model
Ad Hoc
Repeatable
Defined
Managed
Continuous
1
2
3
4
5 Continuous
Improvement,
innovative
ideas
Detailed
measures,
controlled
Integrated
Process
Basic
processes,
repeated
success
Initial, ad hoc

48. VALUE MEASUREMENT
Performance

49. RIN Report on academic library challenges
“ … there is a strong feeling among senior librarians that they
have failed effectively to communicate the value of their services
[and]…in rigorously demonstrating the value of their activities”
“The focus of performance indicators up to now has tended to
be on inputs and outputs … rather than addressing the much
harder issues relating to impact and value. … we believe it is
essential that more work is done to analyse the relationships
between library activities … and learning and research outcomes
… .”

50. The distinction between Quality and Value
R. H. Orr. (1973). MEASURING THE GOODNESS OF LIBRARY SERVICES: A GENERAL FRAMEWORK
FOR CONSIDERING QUANTITATIVE MEASURES. Journal of Documentation. 29 (3), p318.

51. Recent work on impact & value
• SCONUL/LIRG Impact initiative (2003-05)
• SCONUL VAMP initiative (2005-)
• 8th Northumbria paper (2009)
• IMLS LibVALUE project (2010-)
• ACRL‟s „Value of academic libraries‟ (2010)
• 3rd LAC paper (2010) see Library Quarterly
• Neal‟s “polemic” and return to “virtues”
(2011)

52. The Arguments (see Library Quarterly)
• Cross-pressures and failure to prove
worth
• Worth is about value (and impact)
• The value sought is transcendent
• Library assessment has been about
(mainly) quality rather than value
• Value is linked to values
• Values provide the key and route to proof
of worth

53. The Transcendent Library
The transcendent library is one in which
the value can be judged beyond
immediate needs and demands, through
contribution to less concrete aspects of
institutional or societal intent

54. Values and Value measurement
• Value measurement must be linked to
values
• Value measures cannot be chosen until
the values set is agreed
• Institutional values statements are one
current key source for considering value

55. Unmeasured assets?
Petros A. Kostagiolas & Stefanos Asonitis. (2009). Intangible assets for academic
libraries. Library Management. 30 (6/7), p425.

56. A Value Scorecard
• Relationship & reputation capital
• Organisational capital
– Tangible assets and resources
– Intangible and meta-assets
• Library virtue
– Impact and social capital
• Library momentum

57. The Value Scorecard
Dimension 1: Relational Capital
• Competitive position capital
– Reputation
– Reach
• Relational capital
– External relationship development
– Internal institutional relationship development

58. The Value Scorecard
Dimension 2: Library Capital
• Tangible capital
– Collections
– Environments
– Services
• Intangible capital
– Intangible assets formed around the above (meta-
assets)
– Organizational capital
– Human capital

59. The Value Scorecard
Dimension 3: Library Virtue
• Social Capital developed beyond the Library
– Contribution to research
– Contribution to learning
– Contribution to employability
– Contribution to professional and vocational intent
– Contribution to inclusivity
– Contribution to other common goods

60. The Value Scorecard
Dimension 4: Library Momentum
• Capital saved or gained by progress
– Capital assets developed early
– Facilitation of research capital
– Facilitation of learning capital
– Facilitation of quality
– Capital saved by sustainability

61. Comparison with Balanced
Scorecard
• Financial – broadened to capital
development of all kinds
• Process – broadened to capital
development intent
• Customer – beyond immediate
satisfaction
• Learning – fundamental to human capital
development but requires focus on intent

62. CASE: UNIVERSITY OF YORK
Performance

63. Scale comparators (SCONUL data)
Total
institutional
expenditure
(£)
FTE
academic
staff
FTE
students
Total
annual
visits
Total staff
expenditure
(£)
Total gross
library
expenditur
e (£)
Library
grant as
% of total
university
exp.
Total
library
expenditur
e per FTE
student
Informatio
n provision
exp. per
FTE
student
Total
loans
per FTE
student
Article
downloads
per FTE
student
Staff exp.
as a % of
total
library
exp.
NSS
%
Agree
Mean
Score
LEIC 259,942,000 1,529 14,318 1,420,809 2,327,197 6,238,246 2.3 436 236 58 172 37.3 89% 4.4
STRA 227,481,000 1,216 17,047 759,545 2,685,858 6,278,781 2.7 368 184 21 93 42.8 89% 4.3
SALF 188,214,000 837 17,602 924,389 3,208,357 6,315,504 3.3 359 141 36 68 50.8 77% 4.0
ARTS 204,481,000 828 18,908 1,371,157 4,717,563 6,333,439 2.8 335 46 49 9 74.5 84% 4.2
ULST 190,067,000 1,464 20,076 1,439,419 3,165,226 6,418,762 3.3 320 157 18 77 49.3 88% 4.3
ABDN 214,454,000 1,289 13,116 1,107,053 2,895,100 6,440,626 2.7 491 227 25 128 45.0 86% 4.3
YORK 252,668,000 1,328 14,348 374,576 3,283,060 6,513,386 2.4 454 180 59 177 50.4 82% 4.1
UWE 208,472,000 1,200 24,877 n/k 3,663,051 6,563,546 3.1 264 103 24 90 55.8 86% 4.2
SHU 231,301,000 1,557 28,703 1,706,122 3,339,751 6,825,323 2.9 238 104 51 71 48.9 87% 4.2
DHAM 253,543,000 1,392 14,725 1,003,494 3,052,996 7,148,487 2.6 485 248 56 176 42.7 84% 4.2

64. One Director’s perspective …
• Articulating the value proposition
• Translating what we understand about changing need
into strategies and plans
• The transformation and sustenance of our services into a
different social, technological and economic future
• To demonstrate that our value proposition encompasses
a contribution that transcends narrow and local
assumptions about the library’s role

65. The University of York
• Founded 1963
• UK top ten; RAE 8th;
World 81st; 94 Group;
WUN
• 14,000 students
• >30 departments in
humanities, social
sciences, science
• Campus growth
• Collegiate and inclusive

66. York Distinctiveness
“growth [and] preservation of community”
“global competitiveness and ranking”
“inclusive…decision-making”
“residential, campus-based university”
“agility and responsiveness”
“judicious, cautious, …but slow”
“capability and capacity”
“competition making significant & increasing investments
in information systems & services”

67. • Founded 1963
• UK top 15; RAE 8th; World
103rd; Russell Group;
WUN; White Rose
• 15,265 students
• >30 departments in
humanities, social
sciences, science
• Campus growth
– Heslington East
• Collegiate and inclusive
The University

68. • > 1m items
• >120 staff
• Archives extensive &
unique
• Developing digital library
expertise
• JB Morrell Library 1960s,
refurbished 2009-2012
• Now part of a broader
Information Directorate
The University Library

69. Borthwick & Burton
• Borthwick Institute for
Archives founded in 1952 as a
forerunner of the University
• Raymond Burton Library for
Humanities Research opened
in 2003
• Archives moves from its city
centre location to an extension
to the Raymond Burton Library
in 2005 and incorporated as
Library & Archives

70. Branch Libraries & beyond
• York Minster: the oldest and
largest Cathedral Library in the
country
– Operated under a unique
partnership between the Dean
& Chapter and the University of
York
• King’s Manor Library
– Both Grade One listed locations
• Associations with
– The Railway Museum
– Yorkshire Country House
partnership
– York Museums Trust

71. • Directorate reorganised in
2010/11
• Harry Fairhurst ‘commons’
type building opened
Easter 2011
– ‘Joined up’ services
– Range of staff beyond Information
Information Directorate

72. Library Finance
• Staff (50%)
– Numbers 150; 90 fte
– Cost £3.2m
• Content (40%)
– Books £0.4m
– Serials £2.3m
• Other (10%) £0.4m
– Income (£0.4m), capital (£25m+) & new fees (£0.7m)

73. The Library & Archives
• > 1m items
• >100 staff
• Traditional divisions
• Archives extensive &
unique
• Developing digital
library expertise
• Director of Library &
Archives 2007: Director
of Information 2009

74. Proposed Critical Success Factors
1. We must meet information needs
2. We need sufficient resource to achieve
aspirations
3. We must inspire and enable innovation
4. We need to engage the University community
5. We must align with University plans
6. We must manage risk and comply with
regulation

75. Information Strategy diagram
Infrastructure, Content and Knowledge
Assets
Information Flow
Student Experience Research
Staff Capability
and Culture
Understanding,
Engagement
and
Performance

76. The Information Strategy

77. Senior Staff Structure: focus on strategy

78. An outcome driven strategy: content
1. An array of information resources which matches requirements and competitors
2. Better availability of core material for teaching
3. The capability to create and build digital special collections as required
4. An increasing volume of digital information for teaching, research and
administration
5. The ability to offer, manipulate, store and preserve media in all relevant formats
6. The capability to embed the right content into teaching programmes
7. Users and stakeholders engaged with helping select what is required
8. Effective collection, management and distribution of the University’s knowledge
assets

79. A narrative of momentum?

80. Agenda 2007-
• Overturning history
– International standard and measurement tools
• Building a new management culture
• Building a new measurement culture
• Creating digital transformation
• Developing partnerships and alliances
• Achieving environmental transformation

81. ARL ESP Program
Recommendations 2008
1. Practices and procedures for assessment
1. Assessment group and leadership
2. Training
3. Culture
2. An Assessment plan
3. Culture promotion
1. From budget to real costs
2. From regulation to user perspective
3. From risk aversion to „why not?‟

82. ESP Recommendations 2
4. Processes review
1. Classification system
2. Acquisition process review
5. LibQUAL+ results follow-up
6. Review collection development and
liaison
7. Seek areas of collaboration between
Library and the Archives

83. NSS: IT, Library and Learning Resource Satisfaction
Percentage of people responding “mostly agree” or “definitely agree” to questions

84. Library Survey: Trends

85. Zones of Tolerance

86. Comparison across user groups

87. Library Survey Questions
Affect of Service
• AS-1 Library staff who instill confidence in users
• AS-2 Giving users individual attention
• AS-3 Library staff who are consistently courteous
• AS-4 Readiness to respond to users’ enquiries
• AS-5 Library staff who have the knowledge to answer user
questions
• AS-6 Library staff who deal with users in a caring fashion
• AS-7 Library staff who understand the needs of their users
• AS-8 Willingness to help users
• AS-9 Dependability in handling users’ service problems

88. Library Survey Questions
Library as Place
• LP-1 Library space that inspires study and
learning
• LP-2 Quiet space for individual work
• LP-3 A comfortable and inviting location
• LP-4 A haven for study, learning, or research
• LP-5 Space for group learning and group study

89. Library Survey Questions
Information Control
• IC-1 Making electronic resources accessible from my home or office
• IC-2 A library Web site enabling me to locate information on my
own
• IC-3 The printed library materials I need for my work
• IC-4 The electronic information resources I need
• IC-5 Modern equipment that lets me easily access needed
information
• IC-6 Easy-to-use access tools that allow me to find things on my
own
• IC-7 Making information easily accessible for independent use
• IC-8 Print and/or electronic journal collections I require for my work

90. Library Survey: Trends
2004 2008

91. Library Survey: Trends
2009 2010

92. Library Survey: Trends
2011 2012

93. Results 2012: Overall

94. Results 2012: Library Staff

95. 2012: Economics

96. 2012: Education

97. 2012: Law

98. 2012: Management

99. 2012: Politics

100. 2012: Sociology

101. 2012: Social Policy & Social Work

102. Library Survey: E-resource comments
• The more books available electronically, the better, though being
able to make copies of key texts at a reasonable price is a decent
alternative.
• For York Science Park residents it would be ideal if we could offer
them access to all Library services and electronic journals. It would
be fantastic if this could be offered as part of the value of being on
the science park and involved with the University of York.
• The things that matter by far the most to me in my research work
are electronic access to journal articles and a good ILL service.
• I use the electronic access facilities extensively - often to access
publishers web sites via Shibbolith login

103. Library Survey: E-resource comments
• The personal service is great, however i would like to see more electronic
sources (especially key texts) and a more consistent web-search service
• The system of accessing online journals and electronic resources from the
library website is too long and complicated. I don't want the library
website to be opening several tabs to reach one page, it would be good if
this could be made neater.
• Electronic access to journals is by far the most important service for me.
• Electronic resources (particularly the ability to access PDF journals from
my campus accommodation or from home) are very important to me. I
really appreciate the ability to get certain books online.

104. Library Survey: Sample Comments
• The library has a great service, I just wish
sometimes there were more places to sit and
work. (Female UG)
• Please make audiovisual lending longer, or
without the next day 11am deadline. (Male UG)
• There is hardly room for improvement after the
refurbishment. The extra space and staff are
ideally suited to a wide rang of needs. (Female
UG)

105. Library Survey: Sample Comments
• Wider range and depth of books required. (Male
UG)
• Very happy with the way the library is run,
although needs more study space, especially
noticeable during the exam period. (Female UG)
• I think there should be enough of the
recommended books on our reading list so
students don't have to rush for them or return
them a day after the requested for them. (Female
PG)

106. Library Survey: Sample Comments
• The new loans system is on the whole good but the
problem with requesting a book having it for 1 day and
then having to bring it back is huge… (Female PG)
• The flexible loans system is not working for library
users. I am finding it very difficult to access the
resources I need for the length of time required.
(Female UG)
• The new system of book loans/returns works very well.
It would be good to get more than one reminder to
return the book, especially if it's past the time it's
supposed to be returned by. (Female UG)

107. Library Survey: Sample Comments
• The library is a haven for study for me. If I
need to focus on my work away from any
distractions then the library is where I go.
(Male UG)
• Thank you very much for your excellent
service. (Female Academic)

108. Library Survey: And not forgetting…
• …Please put CS texts on a lower floor, replace
with a subject that has a more physically fit
cohort! (Male UG)

109. Recent Archives Comments
• @UoYBorthwick Happy 2013 to The Borthwick
#York Home to wonderful #Yorkshire records
for #FamilyHistory and much more. Hope visit
very soon. [Twitter]
• Been enjoying my research into Rowntree's at
@UoYBorthwick.
• Very helpful and encouraging [Comments
Card]

110. Recent initiatives
• Process review
• 24/7/362
• Loans review & fines
• Induction & marketing
• Collection profiling
• Student experience & morebooks
• Staff surveys and culture
• Programme office & assessment librarian

111. SPEC Kit 303
The key difference between assessment activities in North America and
the UK & Ireland is the focus on web performance in the former and
survey activity in the latter; otherwise the range of performance
measurement related activities are very similar in both the range and type
of activities undertaken.
However there is now a clear trend in North America towards the
appointment of Assessment Librarians and latterly these have been at
increasingly higher levels in the structure.

112. Collection Profiling

113. Collection Profiling

114. Collection Profiling

115. GSA Feedback on Induction
“I found the presenter of the sessions engaging and
professional”

116. Stakeholder perceptions

117. Balanced Scorecard

118. Balanced scorecard perspectives
Relate each to Strategy outcomes:
• Customer
• Financial
• Processes
• Learning & Growth

120. Data and the Balanced Scorecard
“Our statistics [are] currently like an unmade jigsaw which has
pieces missing, and a few pieces which have crept in from
another puzzle”
“Our stats, once we use them in a meaningful fashion, will
[only] give us an incomplete picture of our activity and we’ll have
various bits left over which we don’t need to make the picture
whole”
Liz Waller, Head of Information Services, University of York

121. Service Catalogue
• Currently in progress across
the Directorate
• Defining services we offer
• Allows us to market services
and measure performance
more effectively

122. Customer Service Excellence
• UK standard for
Customer Service
(formerly Charter Mark)
• Embedding in 2013
• All activities of the
Directorate to be
included

123. Staff culture & leadership
• What do we need to be to achieve our
strategy?
• Define the desirable culture
– Narratives, Structures and Paradigm
• Define an action plan to achieve it
– Include the main priorities
• What do you need to do personally to
‘become the change’ and model it to staff

124. SUMMARY
• People measurement
• University Survey results 2008-2011
• Director’s staff meetings 2011-12
• Values and excellence
• ClimateQUAL Results & comparisons
• Actions arising

125. The basic assumption
“… staff perceptions have been identified through
Capita’s research as being linked directly to the quality
of services provided by staff within organisations."
University of York Staff Survey , 2008

126. The Engagement hierarchy

127. Comparison of areas requiring improvement in 2008: where are we now?
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
Departmental Senior
Managers communicate
effectively with staff
Line managers motivate staff
to give their best
Too many approvals are
needed for routine decisions
Staff find their Performance
Review useful
Performance Review made
staff feel that their work is
valued
Staff have agreed a Personal
and Career Development plan
Satisfaction with office
accommodation
Comfortable working
environment
Staff believe that change has a
positive impact
Staff believe that things will
improve as a result of the
survey
2008 - negative response
2011 - negative response

128. Comparison of areas requiring improvement in 2011: where were we 3 years ago?
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
My manager provides me with
regular, constructive feedback
on my performance
My line manager deals with poor
performance effectively
I am involved in decisions at
work that affect me
Too many approvals are needed
for routine decisions
Staff have agreed a Personal and
Career Development plan
I am kept well informed about
matters affecting me
I am confident that my
views, ideas and suggestions are
taken seriously
Departmental Senior Managers
communicate effectively with
staff
Senior Managers consult staff
before making changes that
affect them
Senior Managers lead the
department well
Senior Managers appear to work
well as a team
Learning and development
opportunities help me to
develop my career
Senior Managers consider the
impact on staff when changes
are made
2011 - negative response
2008 - negative response

129. THE CLIMATEQUAL SURVEY
• All staff encouraged and allowed time to complete web-based
survey during their working day
• Confidentiality is of paramount concern
• Approximately 150 questions about the library as a whole, teams
and individuals
• Plus free text comment box
• 30 – 60 minutes long
• Available for 3 weeks

130. SURVEY QUESTION CATEGORIES
Question Categories Sample Question
Diversity “The race of a team member does NOT affect how
much attention is paid to their opinions”
Customer Service “Library employees have the job knowledge and skills
required to deliver superior quality work and service”
Teamwork “This organisation provides a clear understanding of
the purpose of teams”
Continual Learning “Co-workers are able to provide reliable information
about ways to improve job performance”
Leadership “My immediate supervisor has excellent interpersonal
skills”
Innovation “Co-workers tell each other about other new
information that can be used to increase job
performance”
Justice “Do the rewards in your division reflect the effort that
division members put into their work”
Psychological Safety “As an employee in this library one is able to bring up
problems and tough issues”

131. Participation
• Suggested every four years
– Time for culture shift
• 30 North American libraries
– Some now twice
• 4 Sconul libraries
– Leicester
– University of the West of England
– Nottingham Trent

132. RESPONSE
• 119 out of 125 Library and Archive Staff
responded (95%)
• 47 comments received (40%)

134. Climates (9)
• Diversity
– Demographic &
Equality
• Justice
– Reward fairness
• Leadership
– Supervisory level
• Teamwork
• Continual learning
• Deep Diversity
– values difference
– standardisation
• Innovation
• Psychological safety
– Free opinion sharing
• Customer Service

135. Attitudes (7)
• Job satisfaction
• Commitment
• Citizenship
• Withdrawal
• Task engagement
• Empowerment
• Conflict
– Task
– Interpersonal

136. York Results vs UK and US Mean
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Climate for Continual Learning
Climate for Customer Service
Climate for Deep…
Climate for Deep Diversity, Valuing…
Climate for Racial Diversity
Climate for Gender Diversity
Climate for Diversity of Ranks
Climate for Sexual Orientation…
Co-worker Support for Innovation
Distributive Justice
Procedureal Justice
Interpersonal Justice
Informational Justice
Climate for Psychological Safety
Climate for Teamwork, Benefit of…
Climate for Teamwork, Structural…
Job Satisfaction
Leader-Member Relationship Quality
Authentic Leadership
Organizational Citizenship Behaviors
Organizational Commitment
Organizational Withdrawal
Team Psychological Empowerment
Task Engagement
Interpersonal Conflict
Task Conflict
York UK Mean US Mean

137. University of York vs UK and US Mean: Percentage Agreement
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Distributive Justice
Procedureal Justice
Interpersonal Justice
Informational Justice
Leader-Member Relationship Quality
Authentic Leadership
Climate for Deep…
Climate for Deep Diversity, Valuing…
Climate for Racial Diversity
Climate for Gender Diversity
Climate for Diversity of Ranks
Climate for Sexual Orientation…
Co-worker Support for Innovation
Climate for Continual Learning
Climate for Teamwork, Benefit of…
Climate for Teamwork, Structural…
Climate for Customer Service
Climate for Psychological Safety
Job Satisfaction
Organizational Commitment
Organizational Citizenship Behaviors
Organizational Withdrawal
Team Psychological Empowerment
Task Engagement
Interpersonal Conflict
Task Conflict
York UK Mean US Mean

138. ClimateQUAL comments, 2012
“ … the library is a great place to work … supportive
of personal development. It is one of the best
organisations I have worked for in terms of
support, fairness and working conditions”
“ I feel that the recent award won by the library was
a hollow victory … we speak of excellence and
values … I believe this has been earned at the
expense of staff”

139. Key agenda issues
• Customer service climate
– Policy and orientation
• Teamwork & leadership
– Job design, method and behaviours
• Empowerment & innovation
– Permission and practice
• Recognition and communication
– Up, down, sideways

140. A people value scorecard
Enablers (4 ‘C’s)
– Capacity
• Minus confounders
– Absence, turnover
– Capability
• Raw & growth
• Critical mass
– Climate of Affect
• Engagement
• Empowerment
– Culture of momentum
• Programme capability
• Maturity
Outcome proofs
– Market fit
• Sustainability
• Market related impact
– Strategic fit (over time)
• Quality & Improvement
• New product development
– Contribution to
• Productivity
• Creativity
– Competitive impact
• Service development
• Reputational investment

141. The measurement of digital transformation?

142. Measuring the impact of partnerships and alliances?

143. Measuring building Return on
Investment?

144. International comparison
• Joint initiative with the U of Wyoming to:
– Draw on the sabbatical of a senior staff member
– Replicate the study across both institutions
– Focus on value and/or impact around
• New building use
• Help and advice
• Discovery
• Mobile use
• Information literacy

145. Transforming the
environment
“Love the environment in
the new
building, especially some
places really … feel
comfortable “
LibQUAL+ Comment 2011

146. Competing values in
learning?
“The new Harry Fairhurst
building is great but I really
don't think sofas and
beanbags are conducive to
effective studying! It's fun
to see people lying
sprawled all over the floor
though.”
LibQUAL+ Comment 2011

147. The outcome?
“It really makes me want
to learn”
Student Comment 2011

148. Transcendent contributions to …
• The student experience
• Research impact
• Reputation
• Internationalisation
• Financial sustainability
• Society

149. QUESTIONS?

150. Stakeholder Power
Exercise
University of the Arts
London

151. Objectives
• To develop the idea of academic library
stakeholders as customers and clients
• To consider the role of stakeholders in relation
to the library
• To analyse the influence of different
stakeholder groups
• To consider actions to balance stakeholder
power, and apply these to evidence gathering

152. Timings
1055-1100 Theory
1100-1145 Group work (including coffee)
1145-1200 Plenary presentation (5’ per
group) & brief discussion

153. Stakeholders
represent interests from the most individual to the
most global
‘The objectives of an organisation ... should always
be compatible with the requirements of society’
‘an organization operates within the community
and may directly serve it; this may require a
broad conception of the term customer’
British Standards, TQM

154. Stakeholder viewpoint
‘without this ... some groups with
disproportionate influence, or a history of
use of the service, could dominate service
receipt and hence attract an unfair share of
the available resources’
Brophy & Coulling

155. Coalition approach
1. To identify all significant constituencies or
stakeholders
2. To determine what each of these is seeking to
achieve from its membership of the coalition
3. To interpret those aims in terms of the
Library’s overall mission and objectives
4. To suggest ways of assessing the degree of
success of the Library in meeting such aims

156. Exercise: Stakeholder Matrix
List all the groups who have a stake in the success of
your organisation (and therefore library). Include a list
of users from any market segmentation analysis.
Assign to each of these groups a rating of:
their power to influence your library - high or low
their interest in doing so - high or low
Plot the result on the power/interest matrix

157. Exercise: Stakeholder Matrix
What does that mean for your perception of customers and
clients?
What are you going to do about it?
What effect does this have on your plans for measurement
& assessment the library?
What other management actions does your analysis
suggest?
Does this affect your concept of library brand and ideas for
marketing?

158. Stakeholder Power Matrix
POWER
INTEREST
High
Low
HighLow

159. Possible Stakeholders (Brophy)
• Students
• Academic Staff
• University support staff
• library managers
• library support staff
• university managers
• the government
• society:
internationally, nationally, region
ally, locally
• international research
communities
• posterity

160. Constituencies
• the most successful organisations are those
that can use their stakeholders to support
their interests
• different stakeholders have different ideas
of quality