Multiple constituencies model in the identification of library effectiveness
| Published date | 10 November 2014 |
| Pages | 645-665 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/LM-01-2014-0001 |
| Date | 10 November 2014 |
| Author | Susan A Henricks,Genevieve M. Henricks-Lepp |
| Subject Matter | Library & information science,Librarianship/library management,HR in libraries |
Multiple constituencies model
in the identification
of library effectiveness
Susan A. Henricks
Administration, Carnegie-Stout Public Library, Dubuque, Iowa,
USA and Graduate School of Library and Information Science,
Simmons College, Boston, Massachusetts, USA, and
Genevieve M. Henricks-Lepp
Department of Educational Psychology,
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Champaign, Illinois, USA
Abstract
Purpose – Public libraries can benefit from understanding the perspectives of various stakeholders
leading to the development of measures for decision making and competing for funding as well as
demonstrating accountability. The purpose of this paper is to examine library effectiveness from the
perspective of multiple stakeholders from a list of indicators pertinent to today and to determine
which are most important to a constituency of a single library and any differences among the various
constituencies.
Design/methodology/approach – A survey that listed indicators of effectiveness for a public
library was given to four stakeholder groups of a city library: employees, librar y board, library
foundation members, and the public.
Findings – Of the 51 indicators, 39 comprised eight dimensions of effectiveness under the labels of:
user experience, facility, digital collection, social media and board, community use, employees,
administration, and collection management. The number of statistically significant differences was
greatest between the library board and the public as well as the employees and the public.
Originality/value – Indicators of public library effectiveness have not been updated for the
twenty-first century.
Keywords Indicators of public library effectiveness, Library effectiveness, Measuring effectiveness,
Multiple constituencies, Public libraries
Paper type Research p aper
Until 1980, three models defining an organization’s effectiveness have prevailed:
(1) The goal model, also known as the rational system model, measures effectiveness
by goals achieved and “[y] the degree to which an organization is attaining its
internally determined objectives” (Molnar and Rogers, 1976, p. 401).
(2) The system resource model states that there cannot be consensus about the nature
of goals because organizational leaders, and not the organization itself, create the
goals (Yuchtman and Seashore, 1967). The system resource model, which takes
into account the organization’s interdependence with the environment, measures
effectiveness “[y] in terms of its bargaining position, as reflected in the ability of
the organization to exploit its environment in the acquisition of scarce and valued
resources” (Yuchtman and Seashore, 1967, p. 898).
(3) The processmodelviewsanorganizationas meeting goals and maintaining itself
as a social unit. Effectiveness is measured by internal processes and organizational
health as well as meeting goals (Van House and Childers, 1993, p. 2).
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/0143-5124.htm
Received 5 January 2014
Revised 21 May 2014
Accepted 21 May 2014
Library Management
Vol. 35 No.8/9, 2014
pp. 645-665
rEmeraldGroup Publishing Limited
0143-5124
DOI 10.1108/LM-01-2014-0001
645
Identification of
library
effectiveness
These models assume that it is possible for members of an organization to ag ree on the
criteria that constitute effectiveness and create a single statement that supports the
organization’s definition of effectiveness and that a strategic plan exists around which
goals can be framed. This raises the question of how major decision makers handle
disagreements among themselves during the process (Co nnolly et al., 1980, p. 212).
Organizational effectiveness might also be approached from the perspective of
multiple stakeholders ( Jobson and Sc hneck, 1982) o r, as commonly called, a multiple
constituency perspective. Cameron (1978) and others point out that o rganizations have
different constituencies and that the constituencies have their own self-interests.
He proposed “ [y] that since the concept of organizational effectiveness differs with
different constituencies, different levels of analysis, different aspects of organization,
and different research of evaluation purp oses, effectiveness not only encompasses
multiple dimensions, but it is not a unitary concept” (p. 625).
Public libraries have varied stakeholders and multiple constituents such as library
users, library staff members and administration, library boards of trustees, Friends of
the library, local library foundations, city government, communityleaders, state libraries,
and elected representatives to state government. Understanding the perspectives of
various stakeholders can lead to the development of measures, whether objective
or perceptual, that libraries can use when making decisions and competing for funding
as well as demonstrating accountability (Van House and Childers, 1993).
Problem statement
Public libraries are accountable to multiple constituents. Because each constituent can
influence decisions about the library, either directly or indirectly, an effective library
must understand varying perceptions of priorities. When library directors know
how constituents conceptualize effectiveness, they can use the information to assist in
the decision-making process about which services to offer as well as to educate
stakeholders that make decisions about the alloca tion of funds (Van House and
Childers, 1993). Previous research has concentrated on using the multiple constituency
approach at a national level to measure public library effectiveness (Calvert and Cullen,
1992, 1994; Childers and Van House, 1989). However, public libraries have experienced
transformational changes in the intervening years, and no published rese arch has
updated the list of effectiveness indicators critical to the multiple constituency
approach. Those indicators may be qualitative o r quantitative in nature. The purpose
of this study is to examine the approach from a list of indicators pertinent to today and
to determine which are most important to a constituency of a single library and any
differences among the various constituencies.
Information from this research will be helpful for libraries in the strate gic planning
process as a way of identifying the needs of library users and establishing priorities
for the future. Public library directors an d boards of trustees will also find
this information valuable as they work to narrow gaps in perceptions through
educating and raising the awareness of constituents. Likewise, professional
associations and others involved in continuing education will find this information
beneficial for creating content in continuing education programs that seek to
raise awareness of what various constituencies feel is most impo rtant for the library.
Lastly, graduate students in library and information science prog rams who are
interested in management and administration of libraries will be able to use this
information in understandin g the influence that multiple constitu encies have
on the planning process.
646
LM
35,8/9
To continue reading
Request your trial