Editorial

Citation

Thornton, S. (2009), "Editorial", Performance Measurement and Metrics, Vol. 10 No. 3. https://doi.org/10.1108/pmm.2009.27910caa.001

Editorial

Article Type: Editorial From: Performance Measurement and Metrics, Volume 10, Issue 3

At the recent QQML conference on Crete, Fiona Bradley, IFLA’s Programme Coordinator for their “Action for Development through Libraries Programme” presented an interesting overview of IFLA’s experiences with funders’ evaluation requirements and the difficulties of finding an evaluation methodology that is appropriate for the type of international activities IFLA engages in. How do they best persuade funders, potential funders and other stakeholders that the activities they carry out offer value for money, and have an impact beyond the numbers of people trained? How can libraries show exactly how important they are to their users and wider society? In times of recession these critical questions need answers, and Fiona describes current programmes and thinking within the Federation.

Some of the pleasures I enjoy from being involved with the performance measurement community include visiting nice locations for conferences, the delight in meeting friends and colleagues, and taking part in discussions about topics where I can make a real contribution. Occasionally, however, I find myself completely out of my depth, with a discussion going way over my head. For example, in Chania on Crete, Niels Ole Pors, Judy Broady-Preston and I were having a cold beer before our evening meal, when they started a heated discussion about Stone’s Strong Structuration Theory, whether Gidden’s approach was just too complex, and whether there were far better tools available than either – and I have photographs to prove it. I had no idea what they were going on about, and only understood two words out of every three. Eventually I did manage to steer them away from the discussion towards the far more time-critical issue of which restaurant to eat in, but added Structuration Theory to my list of “things I ought to know more about”. Judy has provided us with a paper which explores qualitative methodologies – including Stone’s Strong Structuration Theory – appropriate to a research project she is undertaking to investigate the boundaries and scope of the information profession, with specific reference to the skills/knowledge base and concepts of “professionalism”. Strong stuff, and well worth a read.

We follow this up with two papers looking at gender issues. First, Emmanuel Baro, Osaheni Oni and George Onyenania provide us with a study of the gender differences that affect the publication output of professional librarians in two Universities in Nigeria. With a national promotion system, which requires fixed numbers of publications in reputable journals for each step up, any barriers to publication are critical. The team carried out a bibliographic analysis, followed up by questionnaires and personal interviews, which give us a fairly clear picture of the position Nigerian librarians find themselves in. I only hope that PMM is considered a “reputable journal”!

Shoeb and Ahmed have continued their modified SERVQUAL studies, looking at gender and status differences in satisfaction surveys at a Bangladeshi University. A similar LibQUAL+ study was carried out by Hariri and Afnani in Iran (Hariri and Afnani, 2008), and it is interesting to see that they both came to similar conclusions, with only minor differences between the genders’ appreciation of services. It is always easy to assume that the results of a study in Colorado would be more or less identical to a similar study in France or South Africa or Malaysia, but there is next to no reason to believe that this would be the case. Different countries, mores, educational philosophies, societal structures and even religions could well produce widely different results. That they do not appear to be all that different is just as valid a result than if they were.

Where SERQUAL is, LibQUAL+ is sure to follow. Bruce Thompson, Martha Kyrillidou and Colleen Cook follow through on their earlier work, describing the practical experiences of LibQUAL+ “Lite” control trials, new analysis techniques, and the first implementation of the tool in Hebrew. With the development of the new, less time consuming, format, it is difficult to see anything stopping its remorseless advance as the preferred satisfaction tool. I still stand by my favoured position, that striving to improve customer satisfaction levels is only a minor part of what we should be doing. Improving services is far more important. Get the services right and improving them as part of a continuous programme will lead to improved satisfaction scores anyway. The customer is not always right, and we should not be slaves to their whims and fancies.

Kornelija Petr Balog provides us with the results of part of a much larger on-going study into the evaluation of public and academic libraries library and information services. Her study of the attitudes and culture of Library Directors leads her to conclude that the situation in Croatia has improved a great deal since its independence, and that they are becoming more receptive and appreciative of a performance measurement environment. Nevertheless, they face some hard times ahead, and inability to change their ways of thinking could be disastrous.

Steve Thornton