A 2007 client survey provided valuable feedback on Library services.

A total of 2,019 people completed the survey, of which 1,520 were undergraduates and 365 postgraduates.

Method

The survey used the computer-based LibQUAL+™ survey instrument which is also used by the Library's benchmarking partner Queen’s University in Canada.

It included 22 core questions and five locally selected questions addressing service quality issues. Respondents were asked to indicate their minimum acceptable service level, their desired service level, and their perception of the level of service currently provided by the Library.

The core survey questions were organised into three dimensions addressing  

1. Affect of Service (customer service)
2. Information Control (collections, resources and ability to find information independently and remotely)
3. Library as Place (buildings and amenities).

In addition there were several questions relating to general satisfaction, information literacy outcomes and how frequently they accessed library buildings, online services and information gateways.

Results

You told us your priorities are:

• making electronic resources accessible from your home or office
• ready access to computers/Internet/software
• print and/or electronic journal collections you require for your work
• electronic information resources
• a library website enabling you to locate information on your own
• easy–to-use tools that allow you to find things on your own
• making information accessible for independent use

You told us we are doing well in:

• readiness to respond to users’ enquiries
• adequate hours of service
• library staff who have the knowledge to answer user questions
• having Library staff who are consistently courteous
• providing a library website that enables you to locate information on your own
• our willingness to help you
• making information easily accessible for independent use

You told us you want us to improve in:

• providing access to computers/Internet/software
• providing greater access to journal collections
• providing library space that inspires study and learning
• making electronic resources accessible from your home or office
• providing electronic information resources
• ensuring that subject specialist assistance is available
• helping you identify reliable sources of information

Through your comments you also told us that you wanted: 

• better control of noise
• more inviting spaces

Summary of general findings

• Affect of Service: UWA’s sound overall ratings were supported by numerous positive comments regarding customer service. With the exception of academic staff, all other user groups reported that this was the dimension in which the Library performed best. For academic staff 'Affect of Service' was rated just behind 'Library as Place'. As in 2005 the results also indicated that undergraduates did not value personal services as highly as did academics and postgraduates. Comments highlighted some specific areas for improvement throughout the Library.
• Information Control: As in 2005 this dimension ranked highest in importance for all user groups. At the same time it was the area with the largest gap between the desired and the perceived levels of service provision.
• Library as Place: Undergraduates rated this as the second most important service dimension, in particular a 'Quiet space for individual work' and 'A haven for study, learning or research'. There were however large standard deviations for some items in undergraduate responses indicating a wide range of opinions regarding the extent to which their minimum requirements for 'Library as Place' were being met. Postgraduate students, academic and general staff all rated 'Library as Place' as the least important service dimension.

Summary of significant findings

• For undergraduates the most important service was 'Making electronic resources accessible from my home or office'. This service was also equal first in importance for postgraduates and second in importance for academic staff.
• Postgraduates and academic staff rated 'Print and/or electronic journal collections I require for my work' as the most important service provided by the Library. This service was rated third in importance by undergraduates.
• For the two largest groups of respondents - undergraduates and postgraduates - the Library failed to meet minimum expectations for 'Ready access to computers/Internet/ software'. For both groups the standard deviation of the adequacy gap score was high (2.10 and 2.05) suggesting a wide variety of views.
• For academic staff the Library failed to meet the minimum requirements for six of the eight items in 'Information Control' and barely met the minimum expectations on a seventh. For postgraduates the Library failed to meet minimum requirements on two of the items in the same dimension and barely met minimum requirements in two others.