Determining and communicating the value of the special library

Information Outlook, March, 2003 by Joseph R. Matthews

LIBRARIANS HAVE LONG SEARCHED TO FIND SOME PERFORMANCE MEASURE that will indicate the "goodness" of the library and its services. Measures are a benchmark for many things. Measures can tell us where we've been, where we are, and in what direction we are heading. Intelligent use of measures can guide our decisions and help us make meaningful comparisons.

When a library is established, it is provided with a set of resources. Those resources are organized and directed so that they have the capability to provide a set of services. These capabilities are then utilized to some degree. And, once utilized, the information that has been provided has the potential for a positive, beneficial impact or effect on the organization. The relationship among these variables is shown in figure 1.

As shown in the generalized evaluation model, feedback can and often is employed by the library to make adjustments in other variables. For example, service levels may decline as utilization increases, and feedback can be used to make adjustments by increasing resources so that service levels are improved. The feedback is facilitated through the use of measures.

As shown in figure 1, different types of measures are used to assess each of the four variables. The input measures are associated with the resources or inputs that have been allocated to the library. These input measures are also the easiest to quantify and gather. Librarians will often speak of their collection size, annual budget, number of professional staff, and so forth. These are examples of input measures of the resources provided by the larger organization.

Process measures are focused on the activities that transform resources into services offered by the library and are internally directed. Process measures are reflected in an analysis that will quantify the cost or time to perform a specific task or activity. For example, the cost to order an item, the cost to receive a journal title, and the time it takes from when a journal title is received until it is placed on the shelf for clients to use are process measures. Process measures are ultimately about efficiency. Efficiency answers the question "Are we doing things right?"

Output measures are used to indicate the degree to which the library and its services are being utilized. More often than not, output measures are simply counts to indicate volume of activity. For example, annual circulation, number of people entering the library, and number of reference questions answered are output measures. Historically, output measures were regarded as measures of goodness--after all, the library's collection and its services were being used, often intensively; therefore, the library was doing "good."

Outcome measures indicate the impact or effect of the library and its information services on the individual. The impacts on individuals then have a cumulative impact on the larger parent organization. Outcome measures are the most difficult to assess and, in a majority of cases reported in the literature, have involved the use of a consultant and a major data collection effort. This area is complicated by the fact that some outcome measures are assessed directly, while others are assessed indirectly. To further complicate matters, the value being measured may be tangible or intangible.

Outcomes ultimately address the issue of effectiveness, and effectiveness answers the question "Are we doing the right things?" Outcome measures center on the impact of the library on the parent organization; in other words, they have an outward focus as opposed to the inward focus of efficiency or process measures. One implication of focusing on process measures and outcome measures is that the library may lose sight of the "big picture" and concentrate on process improvements. Doing more things faster is not a good alternative to doing the right things.

A number of authors have suggested that the library should calculate a return on investment (ROT) in order to identify its value for decision makers (Griffiths and King, 1993; Keyes, 1995; Koenig, 1992; Marshall, 1993; and Portugal, 2000). Once the data about the financial impact of the library have been gathered, a cost-benefit analysis can be prepared. On the one hand, the benefits from using the library have been identified by the clients (quantifying the benefits); on the other hand, the costs for providing library services are fairly well known (using the library's budget and preparing a activity-based costing analysis to identify the indirect and overhead costs to the organization). The preparation of the cost-benefit analysis allows the library to prepare an estimate of the library's ROI. Depending on the approach taken, ROI calculations range from 2.5:1 to 28:1 (the value of benefits compared to the costs of the library).

For the special library, there is compelling evidence that libraries provide information services that have real value to the larger organization. This value may be in the form of accomplishments, time savings, and financial impacts--both financial savings and increased revenues. And while the range of benefits to cost that result from library and information center services can be substantial, the positive financial impacts for the larger organization are significant and should not be ignored.