Page 150 - Proceedings-edit-2021_09_20-final

© Proceedings of the Ruhuna Quality Assurance Sessions 2021 (RUQAS 2021)
st
21 September 2021

MC6
Establishment of an Integrated Service Quality Index for University Libraries in Sri Lanka

J.J.G. Arachchige

Faculty of Engineering, University of Ruhuna, Hapugala, Galle

*Corresponding author: jagathga@lib.ruh.ac.lk

Abstract

Measuring service quality has gained an immense interest in service organizations with no exception
for academic libraries. Due to its complexity in definitions and variability of dimensions, the

measuring of service quality in university libraries has become much more complicated. Although

there are many powerful service quality measuring tools such as LibQUAL, SERVQUAL,
SERVPERF, debates, and criticisms over existing service quality measuring tools argue that they are

still unable to fully address the important dimensions of service quality because their approaches are
one-sided: service provider focus or customer focus. For a fact, existing tools have ignored the

contribution of resources capability dimension to the service quality. In this scenario, the

benchmarking strategies to measure the quality becomes questionable in developing country
environments. Many arguments show that the library service quality measure should follow a

multidimensional procedure rather than the measuring of customer satisfaction. Especially the quality
measures should be incorporated with the strategic utilization of resources and capabilities. This paper

seeks the possibility of measuring the integrated service quality in university libraries through a

multidimensional approach associated with both resource-capability measures and the perceived
service quality by librarians (service providers) as well as service users. This conceptualization also

leads to the proposed Integrated Service Quality Index for university libraries of Sri Lanka. The
proposed conceptual model contains five key variables viz. competitive capabilities, dynamic

capabilities, agility capabilities, provider-perceived quality, and user-perceived quality which are
measured through five different questionnaires. The model was empirically tested with a sample of

2247 users and 91 library professionals randomly selected from eight state universities. Findings

suggest that the library service quality measures should consider the resource capabilities in addition to
perceived quality service users. Library professionals and decision-makers of the university can utilize

this model and index to measure and increase the service quality level of the library. The quality
measuring items were based on psychometric procedures. There can be a possible impact of

localization.

133