Home About Hours Libraries For Schools For Libraries Help
Home ›

Goals and objectives, 2008-09

Statistics home | 2007-08 goals | 2006-07 goals | 2005-06 goals

L-net has two goals:

  1. Provide quality online reference service to all Oregonians.
  2. Provide workers in Oregon libraries with skills and tools to deliver online reference service.

We have set four specific objectives for the 2008-09 grant year.

  1. Serve 67 people asking questions per day, or 25,000 for the year, i.e. 25,000 questions.

    2. Beween July 1 2008 and June 30, 2009, we received 31,599 e-mail and chat requests, a 46% increase over the same period last year. This objective is has been met.

  2. Receive an overall 80% satisfaction rating from patrons.

    3. During the first quarter, 88% of patrons surveyed said they were ‘Satisfied’ or ‘Somewhat satisfied’ with our service and 97% said they would use our service again.

    For the second quarter, our software switch necessitated a change of surveys, and for the first three weeks, we shared a survey with Ohio’s KnowItNow24x7 service. The new survey didn’t differentiate between Ohio and Oregon patrons except by asking for a zip code, which was not always entered accurately. Also, the new survey measured satisfaction differently. Instead of asking if patrons were 'Satisfied', we asked them to rate the service 'Excellent', 'Very Good', 'Average', 'Poor' or 'Very Poor'. In mid-October, KnowItNow24x7 began using a local survey, though we continued to use the survey developed with them for the remainder of the year.

    For the 2nd through 4th quarters, 48% of patrons said our service was 'Excellent', 21% said it was 'Very Good', 12% said it was 'Average%', 5% said it was 'Poor' and 13% said it was 'Very Poor'. 77% said they would use the service again, 15% said 'Maybe' and 8% said they would not.

    Where do we place 'satisfaction' on these scales? From one perspective, 81% of patrons rated the service 'Average' or above. From another perspective, only 69% rated it 'Very Good' or above. Only 8% said they would not use the service again, though the percentage that said they will not use the service again is slightly higher than in years past.

    An analysis by time of day indicated that patrons were more likely to rate the service higher if they connected to us during the hours that Oregon librarians were online.

    A review of the comments that patrons left in their surveys reveals two themes. First, patrons are dissatisfied when they need to be connected to their local library, for example when they have a question about their circulation record. Patrons that are connected to remote libraries are impressed at our service when their reference questions are answered from someone far away. The second theme is that patrons are generally dissatisfied with service from Ohio librarians.

    Clearly more needs to be done to establish and enforce best practices for the quality of sessions with our partners in Ohio. More also needs to be done to help Oregon libraries connect to L-net in a way that makes it clear what services we can and cannot provide. Encouraging more libraries to offer local virtual reference services with L-net local may also be part of the solution.

  3. Increase the number of hours Oregon librarians staff L-net to 80 hours per week.

    4. In the week of December 14, 2008, L-net staffed our live chat service with 86 staff hours, meeting our objective. This goal was defined long before the grant period began and it presented a realistic challenge at the time. By the end of the year, we staffed the live chat service up to 96 staff hours per week. This objective has been met.

  4. Deliver training on virtual reference and related topics to 150 Oregon library staff.

    5. Between July 1 2008 and June 30, 2009, L-net held 28 trainings and other events with 266 attendees. This objective is has been met.

Updated 7/2/2009.