VAMP

1
VAMP laying the foundationsClaire
CreaserAngela ConyersSuzanne Lockyer
2
VAMP laying the foundations

• Background to the project
• Phase 1
• Critical Review
• Survey of SCONUL members
• Synthesis and recommendations
• Outcomes

3
Value and Impact Programme

• Key area of concern
• WGPI role to support members
• Three phase programme
• Phase 1 definition scoping
• Review available tools
• Survey understanding use
• Inform future developments
• Phase 2 development
• Phase 3 delivery dissemination

4
Critical review

• Effective academic library
• SCONUL statistics
• User surveys
• One-off projects
• Other sectors
• Other countries
• Selective, not comprehensive

5
SCONUL resources

• Annual Library Statistics
• HELMS
• Trends analysis
• Quality Assurance resources
• Benchmarking support
• Information literacy
• Impact project

6
User surveys

• SCONUL template
• LibQualTM
• In-house instruments
• Rodski

7
Projects

• EQUINOX
• JUBILEE
• JUSTEIS
• Evalued project toolkit
• E-measures project
• Outcomes project

8
Other sectors

• British Library
• Economic impact study
• Public libraries
• Public library service standards
• Impact measures
• Libraries impact project
• Longitude II

9
Other sectors

• Health libraries
• Further Education libraries
• CoLRiC
• fforwm
• School libraries

10
Worldwide activity

• USA ARL
• LibQualtm and DigiQualtm
• MINEStm
• E-metrics
• SAILS
• Australia CAUL
• Performance Indicator database
• Case studies
• User surveys
• Publications guidelines
• South Africa

11
Members survey

• Questionnaire
• 38 respondents
• 68 had undertaken value impact
• Follow-up interviews
• Suggested percentage might be higher

12
Key findings

• Reasons
• Advocacy within institution
• Improve services
• Comparison with others
• Instigated by head of service
• Methodologies
• Customer satisfaction/service evaluation
• Benchmarking

13
Understanding

• Value Impact not understood as unified concept
• Need for evidence
• Linking to university mission
• Differing stakeholder interests
• Quantitative measures

14
Institutional drivers

• Questionnaire
• Little institutional requirement
• Underestimated?
• May be implicit rather than explicit
• Libraries go beyond institutional demand
• Essential to management
• Expected to increase

15
Barriers

• Methodology/statistics
• Flexibility
• Comparability
• Resources time and/or cost
• Particularly for first time
• Skills/knowledge
• 2/3 had little or no knowledge of relevant
  tools/frameworks
• Stakeholder buy-in

16
Advantages

• Improved services
• Advocacy
• Increased funding
• Impressive

17
Synthesis of results

• No general lack of tools
• Lack of understanding of value and impact
• Definitions needed
• Value
• Impact
• On institution
• On users
• Outcome

18
Tools identified and used

• Used by questionnaire respondents
• SCONUL Statistics
• SCONUL User survey
• Libqualtm
• Benchmarking methods
• SCONUL/LIRG impact project

19
Tools identified and used

• Also mentioned
• Evalued
• E-measures project
• British library contingent valuation
• Health library work
• Australian examples

20
Tools identified and used

• Which leaves
• EQUINOX
• JUBILEE
• JUSTEIS
• Outcomes project
• SCONUL QAA guidelines

• SCONUL WGIL resources
• Public library examples
• USA examples (other than LibQualtm)
• South Africa

21
Gaps identified

• Locating appropriate tools
• Lack of knowledge, and confidence
• Adaptable to local needs, but also allowing
  comparisons
• Impact of the library
• Value with respect to institutional aims
• Promotion dissemination

22
Recommendations

• Establish community of practice
• Support for existing tools
• In-depth assessment
• Promotion branding
• Training
• Guidelines on outcomes
• Staffing operational issues

23
Outcomes

• Workshops
• Content development
• Impact on learning and teaching on research
• Value, cost and library staff
• Performance portal

24
Performance Portal
25
Thank youc.creaser_at_lboro.ac.uk