Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
A Feasibility Study of Performance Indicators for Academic Libraries
本研究結果總結如下：(1)關於館藏資源可取性、資源使用率、經費預算收支等指標理想重要程度較高；(2)需花費較多人力及仰賴圖書館以外之單位收集資料、需計算人事與經費成本等計算方式較複雜或資料取得不易之指標實際執行度較低；(3)人力資源的不足為國內大學圖書館實踐績效評估的主要阻礙；本研究依據研究結果提出以下建議：(1) 加強推動大學圖書館績效評估；(2) 大學圖書館應將益於績效評估執行之輔助工具納入考量；(3) 提供績效評估研習與交流活動。|
Now is the knowledge economic era. Facing a new century of highly competitiveness and challenges, commercial companies and non-commercial organizations have to pursue distinguished products and service quality, and libraries are no exception. Through the establishment and operation of performance measurement, libraries can continuously self-examine the pros and cons of administration and service quality; furthermore, libraries can present their achievements to their patrons, parent institutions, and funding institutions. In order to achieve outstanding quality, it is a must to have a performance measurement mechanism to evaluate whether a library conducts her professional works under the guidance of her missions and goals. Performance measurement collects library statistics and other relevant data (i.e. performance indicators), and then analyzes the performance of a library by comparing those indicators with her missions and goals. It is essential to have a standardized and universal guideline for the practical implementation of performance evaluation. In view of this, this study aims at analyzing and developing a set of feasible performance indicators for academic libraries, and comprehending performance assessment obstacles. Wang, Liu& Ke (2012) integrated existing library performance measurement standards (like ISO 11620) and related projects (like BIX), and proposed a total of 59 performance indicators. This study is a follow-up research of their study and comprises two stages. Using a questionnaire survey, the first stage collected the opinions of academic libraries in Taiwan about the ideal and feasible performance indicators. A total of 162 copies of questionnaire were distributed and 109 copies were returned, the returned rate of the questionnaire was 67%. The second stage employed the in-depth interview to obtain detailed opinions about the implementation of performance measurement in Taiwanese academic libraries. 14 interviewees participated in the interview. The research results areshown as follows. First, the performance indicators about the availability of collections, collections use rate and budget were more important than others. Second, indicators of less feasibility possessed features such as high computation cost, and difficult to obtain data. Third, lack of human resource was the main obstacle to realize performance measurement. Suggestions for academic libraries were made, based on the conclusion of this study. First, the performance evaluation for academic libraries should be promoted further. Second, academic libraries could use tools which benefit the implementation of performance evaluation. Third, more activities for staffs to learn about performance evaluation could be conducted. It is hoped that this study can provide suggestions and references for carrying out performance measurement in academic libraries, and it may also be a significant reference for future research.
|Appears in Collections:||學位論文|
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.