A Benchmarking Exercise of Local Authority a Library Services - Report Example

PUBLIC LIBRARIES SERVICE MANAGEMENT A Benchmarking Exercise of Local Authority A Library Services Submitted to The Local Authority A By Director of Library Services, Local Authority A March 14, 2009 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Contents…………………………………………………………………… 2 2. Summary………………………………………………………………….. 3 3. Introduction: 3.1.Background..................................................................................... 3.2 Purpose........................................................................................... 3.3 Scope ……………………………………………………………. 4 5 5 4.0 A Benchmarking Exercise Of Local Authority A’s Library Services 4.1 Ten Key Measures And Metrics………………………………….. 4.2 Strengths/ weaknesses……………………………………………. 5 6-9 10-12 5.0 Appropriate Methodology ……………………………………………... 13-15 4. Conclusions……………………………………………………………….. 16 5. Recommendations………………………………………………………… 16 6. References………………………………………………………………... 17 SUMMARY. The following report begins with a general overview and background of the factors that necessitated the commencement of a benchmarking process for an imaginary Local Authority (A). It then follows up with the purpose of the report as well as a description of its scope. It then gives a comprehensive analysis of the ten measures and metrics that shall be used and they include: the membership and usage; circulation/ collections; the hours open per week/ availability; the I T Efficiency; income/ profitability; expenditure; existing resources/ collection; and customer satisfaction Thereafter, the report analyzes the strengths and weaknesses of the aforementioned measures/ metrics. It discovers that most of them are strong apart from the qualitative measures such as customer satisfaction and service efficiency since they proved to be immeasurable. The report then concludes with a summary of the findings as well as recommendations on how best the benchmarking exercise should be undertaken. INTRODUCTION. Background Following the current economic global crisis that has negatively affected the country, local authorities, like other sectors of the government, have had to grapple with a serious budget deficit. In a bid to reduce this deficit, all local authorities have been forced to make cuts to their budgets to remain afloat in these trying times. Inevitably, library services across the country have been targeted as sectors that require cuts to their budgets and Local Authority A’s Library Services is no exception. Local Authority A is the largest in the United Kingdom and likewise has a relatively big budget for its library services. Nevertheless, it has one of the most (if not the most), cost effective and efficient library service in the country, being in the top 20% of Library Services. Benchmarking is thus a very important contractual tool that can be used to prove the efficiency of the Library Services as well as to establish the much needed performance standards that we are contractually obligated to deliver in a rapidly changing Library Services environment. If enforced successfully, it will go a long way in not only improving the relationship between the Library Services and Local Authority A but also in creating new opportunities for the Library Services with regards to additional services and subsequently, a more optimal return on its investment. Purpose This report seeks to implement a benchmarking exercise of Local Authority A’s Library services in comparison to the Library Services of other local authorities. It mainly seeks to establish what the specific measures and metrics are in this benchmarking exercise; the relative strengths and weaknesses of these measures and metrics; and how exactly the benchmarking exercise will be conducted. Scope An effective benchmarking exercise should be current. The findings in this report are therefore based on library services performed by Local Authority A over the past 18 months. In addition, the report covers all the services in all the libraries within Local Authority A. A BENCHMARKING EXERCISE OF LOCAL AUTHORITY A’s LIBRARY SERVICES 1. Ten Key Measures And Metrics For Local Authority A Library Services It is crucial to identify the units of performance for Local Authority A Library Services. Broadly, these measures and metrics cover the financial and customer satisfaction aspects of the services. More specifically, they include the following: MEASURES METRICS Membership and usage Membership: population ratio; the retention rate; the cost per visit; number of visitors per annum; and annual membership rate. Circulation/ collections Number of loans per day and number of re-shelved materials per loans. Hours open per week/ availability: Number of hours open per day and number of days open per week I T Efficiency Percentage of the population reached by electronic library services; the ratio of quality IT staff to members/ visitors; the cost per session for each electronic library service used; cost per material down loaded; P C use rate; PC hours available per member; PC user satisfaction Staff productivity the number of staff per member (staff to customer ratio); the rate of staff churn per annum; uses by customers of titles subscribed; number of in-house usage of materials; number of staff training per annum Income/ profitability Loans per capita; income per annum; average income per visitor; net income per annum Expenditure The ratio of net income to the net expenditure; percentage of the total acquisitions expenditure to the total collections; cost per loan as a ratio of the cost per collection; cost per customer usage Existing resources/ collection Percentage of stock not used; the ratio of available stock to the total population; average number of donations per month; the number of new acquisitions per annum Service quality The ratio of net income to the net expenditure; percentage of the total acquisitions expenditure to the total collections; cost per loan as a ratio of the cost per collection; cost per customer usage Customer satisfaction Return visits per member; hours spent by person; number of returned orders; the market share; on-time deliveries; new customer acquisitions Justification: Membership and usage: Here, the focus will be on the total daily and annual membership of all the libraries in Local Authority A. The number of registered borrowers, individual members, institutional members, members of the total population and inactive users will be counted. Also included is the total number of visitors to these libraries together with the cost per visit. Local Authority A Library Services has a big membership which in turn translates into greater earnings for the local authorities. Circulation/ collections: This measures the number of items circulating in all the libraries; the number of materials loaned; the number of loaned materials that are then re- shelved; and the types of material to be loaned (material and non material loans). Hours open per week/ availability: This seemingly obvious measure is nevertheless a significant one since the hours that libraries are opened directly translate into the earnings. This measure takes into account the actual amount of time the libraries are in service to the public. I T Efficiency: This measures the effectiveness of the online activities of the libraries and factors in the numbers of PC’s in use; the numbers of PC’s with internet connection; the type of internet connection in place; the number of online users; the number of internet bookings; the number of hours booked; as well as the accuracy of the web links provided by the libraries (Brophy, 2000). Staff productivity: This is an important measure since the quality of the staff directly affects the efficiency of the library services. It depends on the training of the staff, the number of the staff (to prevent overworking), and the staff motivation. (O’Connor, 2007). Income/ profitability: For the Library Services to avoid the budget cuts proposed by Local Authority A, it has to prove that it is profitable and actually has been under funded by the Council. The income analysed will include the income obtained from the sale of service; the operating surplus/ deficit; state grants; contribution from council; and other miscellaneous income. Expenditure: This measure is used to prove that the income obtained is more than the cost of running the library services. The expenditure will be shown to be less than the income and includes such things as staff salary, library material expenditure, council expenditure, the cost of purchasing library services from other council (if so be the case); general administrative/ operational costs; cost of information services and so on. (Davis, 2006. Existing resources/ collection: This is an important measure in that, the success of a library depends on the materials in existence. If there is a wide range of material (both old and current), more customers will be drawn to attend. Service quality: This measure deals with the over all quality of service provided by the library facilities and also the staff. This is an integral aspect of any organizations success. Customer satisfaction: This is probably the most important measure since, in every organization, the customer is king. Without customers, the libraries would not be in existence thus it is very crucial to satisfy the customers on every level. In addition, customer loyalty, customer retention, customer churn, accessibility to information, reliability can also be additional used to measures. (Davey, 2008). 2. The Relative Strengths And Weaknesses Of These Measures And Metrics Benchmarking is a complex exercise that requires continuous re- fining, re- examination and fine tuning. It is very rare that the measures and metrics used will always be relevant to the organization it is meant for. As a result, there are various strengths and weaknesses of the chosen measures and metrics. According to Trimble (2001), for measures and metrics to be effective in performance enhancement, they need to be SMART (Specific, Measurable, Actionable, Relevant, and Timely). With regards to specificity, it means that the measures should precisely target the area you need to measure. For them to measurable, one should be able to collect the measures and metrics both accurately and completely. As for the actionable aspect, the measures/ metrics are easy to understand thus if one charts the performance as good, it should be clearly understood how such a conclusion was reached at. The relevance of the measures/ metrics implies that whatever is being measured is directly important to the performance while the timeliness is with regards to the measures that are required at the current time (as opposed to past performances). The following is an analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of the ten aforementioned measures and metrics against this SMART principle: Membership and usage: This is a strong measure since as a measure, it counts the specific number of members and visitors the libraries have. A metric such as membership: population ratio is not only specific, it is also measurable as well as being relevant since the number of members and visitors directly affect the income and subsequent profitability of the Library Services. This measure thus has very little, if any, weaknesses. Circulation/ collections: This is yet another very strong measure due to its relevance to the performance of the Library Services. The greater the circulation of the library materials, the greater the income. It is a specific, measurable, actionable, relevant and timely measure and thus has very little weakness. Hours open per week/ availability: As a measure, the number of hours open is admittedly a relatively weak measure since it is a standard measure because most libraries adhere to the same working hours- very few libraries operate outside of the standard hours thus this measure ca be seen as being a non- factor in the performance of the library. If it was in a different sector such as in a supermarket chain, this measure would be highly relevant since not all supermarkets operate at the same hours as some are open for twenty four hours while others are not. This measure can thus be an optional one. I T Efficiency: In the fast changing world of Information Technology, the IT arm if a library cannot be downplayed. Since many operations have become digitalized and the fact that the use of online libraries is on the increase, this measure is highly relevant. A metric such as the cost per session for each electronic library service used or the cost per material down loaded directly affects the income and is very crucial for this benchmarking process. Staff productivity: The productivity of the staff affects the productivity since a well- qualified and highly motivated workforce leads to better service delivery. However, as a measure, it is quite weak since it is difficult to collect concrete data on such a qualitative measure. In addition, since the staff are human beings and not mere products/ services, it is hard to bundle all staff together since in all organizations, there exists both good and bad staff. It is thus not an easily measurable measure. Income/ profitability: This is a very relevant measure and most importantly, it is a measurable one. It is easy, through a cash flow statement, to measure whether the Library Services are profitable or not. Net per annum income as a metric is easy to obtain and is also a very timely metric as the timeframe is on year. Expenditure: Existing resources/ collection: This is likewise a relevant and measurable measure for similar reasons as the ones for the income measure. Service quality: Whereas this measure is important, it has its weaknesses as it is difficult to measure. It is mainly dependent on customer feedback which may not always be forthcoming. The Library Services may therefore be fooled into thinking that the services are good simply because there are no/ little complaints without considering the fact that some customers may decide to simply stop coming to the library as opposed to filing a complaint. It is thus has the tendency of being an inaccurate measure. Customer satisfaction: This is a similarly weak measure as it is hard to ascertain whether a customer is happy or not because it is a qualitative measure. 3. Appropriate Methodology for Comparing the Performance of the Internal Library Services with External Library Services. All benchmarking processes are rigorous processes and this one is no exception. To compare the services of Local Authority A and those of other local authorities is a time, money and energy consuming exercise that requires focus and commitment on the part of the Library Services. As a result, we shall use the form of benchmarking known as Competitive Benchmarking. This involves benchmarking against direct and external competitors, in this case, the library services of all the other local authorities in the United Kingdom. This will allow us to compare our performance with that of the others. According to AQPC (2009), a four- pronged method of approach shall be undertaken thus: planning, collecting of data, analyzing and adapting. The following is a detailed analysis of this methodology: Planning: The benchmarking exercise will begin with identification of the key measures and metrics concerned with the Library Services as already touched on previously in this report. The identification is then followed by making clear and precise definitions of the areas to be analyzed as well as the clear documentation of these defined concepts. In addition, all the data collection tools to be used are refined and finalized. Research is then undertaken to identify the best local authorities to be studied. Since Local Authority A is a large local authority, similarly large local authorities (in terms of population) shall be chosen since they are relatively the same in terms of size and performance. Data Collection: This is the part of the benchmarking exercise that is the most important since the data collected here is what will form the basis of the findings of the exercise. It is also the most time and money consuming part of the exercise. As such, great care should be taken to ensure accurate data is obtained. Here, both primary and secondary sources of data should be collected for a comprehensive analysis to be achieved. The primary data will be collected mainly through interviews and the use of questionnaires. Interviews will be conducted in libraries within Local Authority A then in the other three cities for a comparative analysis. The questionnaires shall summarily also be filled in by respondents in all these four local authorities. The secondary data will then be collected by analyzing the respective historical accounts/ records of libraries in all the four cities. This is often difficult as some of the library services may not co- operate or even charge a fee for this access to records which will mean additional costs to the benchmarking exercise. Data Analysis: During this phase of the exercise, existing trends in the library industry shall be analyzed so as to predict what may be necessary for future growth and stability. In addition, practices that either enable or hinder the superior performance of the Library Services will be identified. Thereafter, a final report will be presented. This report will contain all the main findings and insights. This will enable the benchmarking team to learn from the other Library Services and find out what practices to lessen and those areas that need improvement. Here, all the Library Services of the four local authorities will have the chance to interact and learn from each other through the networking and presentations. Adaptation: This will be the final part of the benchmarking exercise and shall entail the actual application of the exercises findings. It occurs after the exercise is over and the participants will have returned back to the Library Services. The findings are implemented and this begins with the development of an action plan that shows how the findings will be executed practically. CONCLUSIONS Following the benchmarking exercise, several issues arose about the process as well its implementations. The following conclusions were arrived at: The benchmarking exercise is a matter of urgency and should thus be undertaken as soon as possible and with expediency. Local Authority A’s Library Services is an efficient and high performing service in relation to other services and should thus be exempt from the budget cutting exercise. Therefore, while the concerns of the City Council cannot be ignored, this report has proved that Local Authority A’s Library Services is a cost efficient service that should continue to be given the financial support it has been receiving in the past. RECOMMENDATIONS. The measures and metrics to be used need to be fine tuned and refined to ensure that they will directly influence the performance of the Library Services in a positive manner. A qualified team from the Library Services (other than the Director of Library Services) should be formed consisting of the best brains so as to undertake an adequate exercise that will provide relevant results that will directly impact on the Library Services. For the benchmarking exercise to be successful, a top notch benchmarking firm should be contracted to help Local Authority A to undertake an unbiased and accurate process. REFERENCES APQC. (2009). Benchmarking Methodology. Available: URL http://www.apqc.org/portal/apqc/ksn/BenchmarkingMethodology.pdf?paf_gear_id=contentgearhome&paf_dm=full&pageselect=contentitem&docid=108227 Last Accessed 14th March, 2009. Brophy, P et. al. (2000).Equinox Library Performance Measurement and Quality Management System Performance Indicators for Electronic Library Services. Available: URL http://equinox.dcu.ie/reports/pilist.html Last Accessed 13th March, 2009. Davey, N. (2008). Customer metrics: What should you measure? Available: URL http://www.mycustomer.com/cgi-bin/item.cgi?id=133564 Last Accessed 13th March, 2009. Davis, D. M. (2006). Metrics and Measurement: Moving from Outputs to Performance. Available URL http://74.125.95.132/search?q=cache:C1_HBPWjU-AJ:www.gpo.gov/su_docs/fdlp/pubs/proceedings/06spring/metricsandmeasurement.pdf+METRICS+USED+TO+MEASURE+LIBRARY+PERFORMANCE&cd=9&hl=en&ct=clnk&client=opera Last Accessed 13th March, 2009. O’Connor, S. (2007). Metrics of library value. Hong Kong Polytechnic University. Available URL http://74.125.95.132/search?q=cache:j6miQ4HIKvMJ:repository.lib.polyu.edu.hk/jspui/bitstream/10397/143/1/Metrics%2520of%2520library%2520value%2520Beijing%2520Book%2520Fair%2520OConnor%25201-1.ppt+how+to+measure+metrics+in+libraries&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&client=opera Last Accessed 14th March, 2009 Trimble, D. (2001). How to Measure Success: Uncovering The Secrets Of Effective Metrics. BPR On-Line Learning Centre Series. Available URL http://www.prosci.com/metrics.htm Last Accessed 14th March, 2009 Read More