Thank you for your participation

As part of our continuous effort to improve library services, the University Library System conducted a survey from November 7 – December 6, 2011. The Library would like to thank all participants who took their time to complete the survey.  As a token of thanks, an iPad 2 and 10 book coupons were given out as incentive prizes in a lucky draw.  Prizes were presented by the University Librarian on January 17, 2012 at the University Library.

Congratulations to all prize draw winners!

The University Librarian, Dr. Colin Storey,

presented prizes to the prize draw winners.

Summary of Results

• In November 2011, the CUHK Library joined with another five JULAC (Joint University Librarians Advisory Committee, Hong Kong) libraries to conduct the second LibQUAL+ survey to assess library service quality. The first LibQUAL+ survey was held in 2007.
• The Library received 2,763 valid responses and half of the respondents (1,401) provided written comments. Core questions of the survey covered three service dimensions of service quality: Affect of Service (helpfulness and competency of library staff); Information Control (access to and provision of print and electronic resources); and Library as Place (the physical environment).
• For each question, respondents were asked to indicate their minimum acceptable service level, their desired service level, and their perceived service level provided by the Library on a scale from 1 (low) to 9 (high). Two gap scores were calculated: Service Adequacy (Perceived Score – Minimum Score) and Service Superiority (Perceived Score – Desired Score). The gap scores are scaled such that higher scores are more favorable.
• Overall Performance: The results in 2011 showed remarkable improvement across all service dimensions in comparison to the 2007 LibQUAL+ survey. The rating is benchmarked against the survey outcomes of peer institutions, including 138 colleges and universities around the world. The Library’s overall service performance rating of 1.03 (adequacy mean scores) is notably higher than the peer groups’ average rating of 0.62. Our overall results are also above the JULAC libraries average of 0.99.
• Affect of Service: The Library received higher scores in Affect of Service (adequacy mean scores of 1.25), which measures the quality of interactions with library staff and various attributes of the staff (courteous, knowledgeable, caring, helpfulness, etc.). This high rating is also supported by many written comments praising the Library services and staff.
• Information Control: The overall performance in this area showed significant improvement (0.92) compared with the results in 2007 (0.56). Over the past few years the Library has strengthened its electronic resources, in part as a response to findings in the 2007 survey. Users are now more satisfied with e-resources and their ability to access them.
• Library as Place: The largest gap between the minimum expectations and perceived level of service appeared in Library as Place. The result was not surprising since the University Library was midway through a new Library Extension project in the past year. The construction noise made it unpleasant to study. Conditions will improve after the Library Extension project is completed in 2012.