Natoinal Library of Australia - Gateways

User Satisfaction Surveys
An Evaluation of the Document Supply Service

Firstly, thank you to all the libraries and library users who participated in the National Library Document Supply Service User Satisfaction Survey, conducted by Leapfrog on behalf of the Library in June this year. In total, 250 libraries completed the online survey. Some of these also participated in two online focus groups which discussed interlending issues and trends that formed the basis of the questionnaire. A similar survey was conducted for the Copies Direct service and 122 individual users participated online. This article describes the results of both surveys.

Findings of the Copies Direct Survey
Users of the Copies Direct service request material for a variety of reasons. Over half the users (52%) use it for their own interest—21% for family history research, 46% for their work, 20% for academic purposes, 26% for commercial work and 24%  for publications (multiple answers were allowed in this question). The highest usage is by New South Wales.

The majority of users (74%) use Copies Direct only occasionally. Only 27% use the service on a regular basis. The service is easier to access now through the new catalogue and most of the regular users commented on the improvements.

While 97% are happy with the service, more than half (53%) are very satisfied and while 90% are satisfied with delivery times, many users commented that they would like the turn around time to be even quicker.

The service is valued because of its access to the Library’s collection, its excellence and its convenience. The main reasons for recommending the service are the superior delivery of the service (30%), and the convenience (21%). Users commented on the advantages of being able to order copies from wherever they were located. Only 78% are satisfied with communication from staff and 78% are satisfied with the order form but there is a sense that users felt it has improved.

Suggested strategies for improving use and satisfaction of the service include: :

The Findings of the Document Supply Service Survey
The Document Supply Service survey included general questions on interlibrary loans and document delivery.

Speed of delivery and price are the main considerations in the decision making process. For copies local libraries, Infotrieve and reciprocal networks such as Gratisnet are highly valued services which are clearly more competitive than the National Library Document Supply Service. The Library was the fourth most popular, chosen by 45% of respondents. For loans NLA joins Kinetica Document Delivery (KDD) and local libraries as the preferred choices for more than 50% of respondents.

For copies, local libraries (92%) and the NLA (66%) are the strongest choices for public libraries. For university libraries, the priorities are different with KDD and the British Library very strongly preferred; Cisti also figures strongly here (56%). For loans, KDD (79%), the British Library (79%) and local libraries (72%) are important to university libraries. Public libraries (95%) favour local libraries followed by NLA (66%) and Ilanetweb (66%).

There was some dissatisfaction with the turnaround time for the Core service. It may be because librarians use Core most often and have the strongest experiences with this type of service. The Interlibrary Resource Sharing Code service level chosen is primarily Core, with faster levels used if the patron expresses an urgent need. Some librarians, however, reported they discourage the use of faster services where possible because it is more work for them but primarily they fear a backlash in user expectations.

Satisfaction with the Document Supply Service was analysed in terms of regular users and infrequent users; 94% of frequent users were satisfied versus 80% for irregular users. The NLA, whilst satisfying the needs of its frequent users well, is not receiving the praise from them, nor from other users, that it has in the past.

The National Library’s key strengths are perceived as the range and depth of its collection, followed by its loan period. Several survey participants also commented unfavourably on the Library’s lost book fees.

Libraries were also asked about future directions, in particular their plans regarding unmediated interlibrary loans. Librarians generally are not enthusiastic about unmediated interlibrary loans as over 50% agreed that they have concerns about keeping track of books (65%), their finance departments’ dislike of decentralised billing (57%) and less cost accountability (52%). Librarians generally believe that patrons become independent on the one hand and will expect quick self service (76%); however, on the other hand they also believe that the plethora of information will mean they seek more help from librarians (72%). Librarians expect that there will be less interlibrary loan activity and more online access to e-resources, especially with an increasing number of libraries joining consortia.

There are a number of areas identified for improvement and consideration in a wider arena, particularly:

Speed of delivery and ILRS Code: Clearly the existing turn around time for Core services is not meeting library needs well. The emergence of speedier services has led to an increase in expectations of faster turn-around times. This was raised at the National Resource Sharing Working Group and Policy Committee meeting and a review of the Code has been referred to ALIA.

Improvements in staff knowledge: Knowledge of the collection and knowledge of copyright would help to improve users satisfaction.
—Margarita Moreno, Manager Document Supply Service

| Contents list for this issue of Gateways |