Quest for quality

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to assess the expectation and perception of the users of a library of reputed special academic institute in India on quality of library services. The paper is an effort to identify a service gap within five SERVQUAL dimensions rated by the library users. Design/methodology/approach The study was conducted through a survey methodology. The survey was implemented through a questionnaire based on five SERVQUAL dimensions. The data were collected by using 22 attributes of SERVQUAL for user expectations and perceptions of special academic institute library, and the gap score between expectation and perception of users was calculated. Based on the expectation mean score and gap score of each attributes, the researchers have identified the service shortfall in five SERVQUAL dimensions. Findings The result of the study indicates that there is an overall service quality (SQ) gap in services provided by institute library. However, the library is providing relatively satisfactory services to the faculty, but it needs to enhance up to the expectation level of its services to their registered participants. From the study, the average expectation score is very high and it indicates that users expect more from the institute library, particularly in Reliability and Tangibles dimensions. Out of the total 22 SERVQUAL attributes, the result reflects that 10 SERVQUAL attributes have high expectation and high service gap. Originality/value This paper will assist libraries to improve their library services, particularly in special academic training libraries. Determining SQ has been originated from marketing discipline that has progressively shown its value in the discipline of library and information science profession. This study contributes to the emergent body associated with SQ measures in libraries. Expectation-service gap chart and expectation-service gap grid are the major contribution and rarely found in SERVQUAL literature.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 21 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.