Library employees' attitudes towards the ... - IngentaConnect

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/0143-5124.htm

Library employees’ attitudes towards the measurement and appraisal of their work performance Study in Estonian university libraries Kate-Riin Kont

Library employees’ attitudes 521 Received 8 August 2012 Revised 15 January 2013 Accepted 23 January 2013

Institute of Information Studies, Tallinn University, Tallinn, Estonia and Acquisition Department, Tallinn University of Technology Library, Tallinn, Estonia, and

Signe Jantson Institute of Information Studies, Tallinn University, Tallinn, Estonia, School of Business and Economics, Tallinn University of Technology, Tallinn, Estonia and Bibliographic Department, Tallinn University of Technology Library, Tallinn, Estonia Abstract Purpose – The aim of the current article is to clarify how the staff of Estonian university libraries define the concepts of performance and efficiency in the context of libraries, what is the general conception of performance measurement and evaluation, what impact it is believed to have on the personal future career, and how one’s own efficiency and performance is evaluated in comparison with one’s colleagues. Design/methodology/approach – The data used in this paper are based on reviewing and summarizing of relevant literature to provide an overview of the concepts of performance and efficiency in general and in the context of the library as well as on results of the study, held in 2011/2012 in Estonian university libraries to determine the attitude of the libraries’ staff towards work organisation and performance appraisal. Findings – Although a number of Estonian university librarians highly evaluated performance measurement and appraisal as a possible source of information and feedback for improving their work performance and seeking out their further training and education needs, they unfortunately do not see any relation between performance improvement and their salary increase and career. As for the library as a whole, performance appraisal is profitable, although it is assumed that it might raise some problems. Efficiency and performance in the library context are rather associated with service and user satisfaction. Performance measurement and appraisal system in Estonia university libraries is almost non-existent and definitely needs to be developed. Originality/value – To the best of the authors’ knowledge, no research has been previously carried out in the library context to determine library employees’ attitudes towards their work organisation and coordination as well as measurement and appraisal of their work performance. Keywords University libraries, Management, Human resource management, Employees’ attitudes, Performance, Efficiency, Performance measurement, Performance appraisal, Estonia Paper type Research paper

Library Management Vol. 34 No. 6/7, 2013 pp. 521-537 q Emerald Group Publishing Limited 0143-5124 DOI 10.1108/LM-08-2012-0051

LM 34,6/7

522

Introduction The current economic climate in which we find libraries, staff, and selves working, is unfamiliar and stressful to many libraries. Because of that many people have found their jobs less secure than they had imagined. Most of the Estonian research libraries are cutting budgets, including workforce, in order to remain viable. Although the demand for public services, including library services, has grown, the global financial and economic crisis that reached Estonia like the other Baltic States, has forced to reduce the number of libraries as well as librarians. In 2006 there were 1,106 libraries of different types in Estonia, but by the year of 2011, the number of libraries has gone down to 1,005 – one national library, 563 public libraries, 50 research and special libraries and 391 school libraries. In 2006, Estonian libraries employed 2,886 librarians, whereas in 2011, 2,592 librarians. The number of librarians is decreased in all types of libraries, however, more in research and special libraries – from 923 in 2006 to 787 in 2011. At this stage successful management involves managing people more than ever in a way that motivates and enables them to work at their highest levels of productivity and in harmony with one another so that the organisation is thriving in terms of efficiency, service, effectiveness, quality, and value (Chimato, 2009, pp. 342-3). Considering the circumstances that affect the effectiveness and performance of library work, the most vital factor is whether the employee has sufficient attitude for having his/her job done at all, secondly, whether he/she is enough motivated for individual development and improvement, also for increasing his/her work performance. The third factor is whether the employee enjoys necessary working conditions that also embraces work organisation. Ensuring the provision of quality services to university library’s users depends both on the library’s donors as well as on highly qualified and effective library staff. The economic efficiency of the services also rests with the financial opportunities of the library together with the performance of the staff. As attempts are made to increasingly economize or redirect financial resources, the vital key issue for libraries remains the performance and economic efficiency of the staff. Services constitute about 60 per cent of the world GDP (Gross Domestic Product) and service organisations, including libraries, are the largest segment of the world economy. As the sector continues to mature, there are new demands on the management of such organisations: higher customer expectations, employee transparency and a constant pressure on profitability (Agarwal, 2011). The measurement of performance, effectiveness, efficiency and productivity of service sector is beset with two major issues. First issue relates to problem of conceptualisation. A factory worker works in a culture where his/her accountability, performance or simply the output is transparent and quantified and his/her total earnings are in some way or the other correlated to the same. In contrast, for the office worker it is generally presumed that his/her work cannot be measured. His/her work is based on several inputs such as data, information, technical knowledge, professional skills etc. The second issue relates to the process of its measurement: how to quantify the inputs and the outputs (Vrat et al., 2009, p. 182). Information providers and librarians are not machines; in spite of predictions to the contrary, the day has not come yet in which computers have taken the place of human beings in providing information services to patrons. As such, librarians and information professionals of all types should remember that the organisational psychology that affects all other

fields applies to them, too. It is imperative to recognise that factors that impact the library employee as an individual can impact his/her performance as a service provider as well (Murray, 1999, p. 1). Performance appraisal has strategic importance for Estonian university libraries for providing quality service and also for improving work efficiency. Conducting this is not only a burden to be carried by and for the heads of departments and other managerial staff members; it can expand to all the levels of the organisation and become a part of everyday work. In 2011/2012, a survey using a questionnaire, was performed in Estonian university libraries governed by public law (Tallinn University of Technology Library, Academic Library of Tallinn University, Library of the Estonian Academy of Arts, and Library of the Estonian Academy of Music and Theatre). The aim of the survey was to determine the attitude of the libraries’ staff towards work organisation and performance appraisal. The librarians-oriented online questionnaire aimed to establish the opinions of work organisation and performance appraisal prior to launching a cost accounting pilot study based on the Time-Driven Activity-Based Costing (TDABC) methodology. The sample selection criterion provided that two libraries with higher and two with lower budget should be included. Although all four libraries have different structures, and the numbers of staff and population to be served, the services provided are rather similar, and thereby, comparable. The questionnaire consisted of four parts: A) Job satisfaction: general issues; B) Learning and individual development; C) Work organisation and coordination; D) Performance measurement and appraisal. Connected with the fact, that the initial questionnaire included 71 questions, together with questions about the respondents and some specifying questions, the authors of the survey decided to analyse only the part D of the questionnaire (which contained 20 questions) for the purpose of the current paper. The aim of the current paper is to find out: . how the staff of Estonian university libraries define the concepts of performance and efficiency in the context of libraries; . what is the general conception of performance measurement and evaluation; . is there relation between performance improvement and salary increase and career in Estonian university libraries; and . how one’s work efficiency and performance is evaluated in comparison with one’s colleagues. The concept of performance and related terms Performance is a multi-dimensional concept. By Austin et al.(1991) work performance is a key construct in human resource management, because criteria for promotion, as well as for selection validation purposes, are frequently drawn for the job performance domain (The Blackwell Encyclopedic Dictionary of Human Resource Management, 1998, p. 188). Sonnentag and Frese (2002) argue that when conceptualizing performance one has to differentiate between an action (i.e. behavioural) aspect and an outcome aspect of performance. The behavioural aspect refers to what an individual does in the work situation. Not every behaviour is subsumed under the performance concept, but only behaviour which is relevant for the organisational goals: “Performance is what the organisation hires one to do, and do well”. Thus, performance is not defined by the action itself but by judgemental and evaluative

Library employees’ attitudes 523

LM 34,6/7

524

processes. Moreover, only actions which can be scaled, i.e. measured, are considered to constitute performance. The outcome aspect refers to the consequence or result of the individual’s behaviour. In many situations, the behavioural and outcome aspects are related empirically, but they do not overlap completely. Outcome aspects of performance depend also on factors other than the individual’s behaviour (Sonnentag and Frese, 2002). Performance is also a core concept within work and organisational psychology. The conventional definition of performance uses the metaphor of the production process. Performance is the outputs and outcomes and activities. Inputs (such as financial and human resources) are allocated to organisations in order to stage activities that yield outputs (products and services). Maximisation of financial profit is not normally an objective of public sector organisations. However, public sector organisations should also consider whether they provide the right product or service. Performance is thus, in economic parlance, about maximizing profit for society (Doore Van et al., 2010). Performance has a quality that can be either high or low. Both private and public sector organisations need highly performing individuals in order to meet their goals, to deliver the products and services they specialized in, and finally to achieve competitive advantage. Performance is also important for the individual. Several social psychologists (e.g. Vroom, 1964; Maier, 1955) have emphasised the motivational and behavioural aspects of performance. An individual’s performance is affected by his or her capacity, willingness and opportunity to perform. Accomplishing tasks and performing at a high level can be a source of satisfaction, with feelings of mastery and pride. Low performance and not achieving the goals might be experienced as dissatisfaction or even as a personal failure. Moreover, performance – if it is recognised by others within the organisation – is often rewarded by financial and other benefits. Performance is a major – although not the only – prerequisite for future career development and success in the labor market (Van Scotter et al., 2000). Efficiency is a management concept with a long history, running from scientific management to business process re-engineering. Efficiency is generally considered to be one of the Great management virtues. From scientific management to business process re-engineering, there has been a sustained concentration on efficiency as a core business value, with a strongly assumed link between efficiency on the one hand and productivity and profitability on the other. The theory is a simple one: efficient businesses survive while inefficient ones go to the wall. In the early 20th century Harrington Emerson, an engineer, argued that an efficient organisation was a necessary prerequisite to task and process efficiency. Rejecting the machine metaphor of scientific management, Emerson conceived of an organic organisation where efficiency was a natural occurrence, not an imposed set of targets and procedures – a concept that has a lot in common with total quality management and a management philosophy that remains valid and important (Witzel, 2002). Efficiency nowadays typically means producing a good or service at the lowest cost possible while maintaining a constant level of quality, an economic technique measuring the ratio between resources expended and the amount of work produced (White, 1999). Hannu Laitinen highlights in his doctoral thesis about efficiency (1989). Efficiency is in Laitinen’s approach as the rate of discount which makes the discount amount of produced outputs equal to the inputs needed in production. Laitinen also uses terms productive efficiency and economic efficiency (Rantanen, 1995, p. 17).

ISO (International Organisation for Standardisation) International Standards ensure that products and services are safe, reliable and of good quality as well as give state of the art specifications for products, services and good practice, helping to make them more efficient and effective. For organisations, they are strategic tools that reduce costs by minimizing waste and errors and increasing productivity. In order to compare library work performance internationally, data collection and analysis is based on the following international standards: . ISO 2789:2006. Information and documentation. International library statistics (Estonian language version in 2007). . ISO 11620:2008. Information and Documentation. Library Performance Indicators (Estonian language version in 2010). These standards are applied in the daily activities of different types of libraries around the world. By ISO: 11620 performance is the effectiveness of the provision of services by the library and the efficiency of the allocation and use of resources in providing services. Performance indicator is expression (which may be numeric, symbolic or verbal) used to characterise activities (events, objects, persons) both in quantitative and qualitative terms in order to assess the value of the activities characterised, and the associated method (EVS-ISO 11620: 2010, p. 5). In the context of the library work, effectiveness by ISO 11620 measure of the degree to which given objectives are achieved. It means that an activity is effective if it maximizes the results it was established to produce. In the context of the library work, efficiency measure of the utilisation of resources to realize a given objective. An activity is efficient if it minimizes the use of resources, or produces better performance with the same resources (EVS-ISO 11620: 2010, p. 3). Performance appraisal is the process of identifying, observing, measuring, and developing human performance in organisations. This term refers to organisational practices whereby the performance of individuals in the organisation is formally appraised by others for a number of purposes. Performance appraisal enables to determine both individual as well as group (team) work’s accordance with the goals as set. It is based on the evaluation of work results, activities (behaviour) and competence of employees. The best appraisal results are achieved by combining various appraisal indicators and methods (Tu¨rk, 2005; Kuvaas, 2006). Usually the appraisers are direct supervisors of the employees. Performance appraisal is a central human resource management function, since it is an input or component of so many other human resource management activities (The Blackwell Encyclopedic Dictionary of Organizational Behavior, 1998, pp. 411-15; The Blackwell Encyclopedic Dictionary of Human Resource Management, 1998, pp. 252-3). The performance appraisal may also be used to assess the effectiveness of a training program or the validity of a selection mechanism. And the results of the performance appraisal also drive a variety of personnel actions. For example, promotions are often largely determined by performance raitings. Trainings, salary increases, layoffs, and terminations may also be directly tied to performance appraisal (The Blackwell Encyclopedic Dictionary of Organizational Behavior, 1998, pp. 411-15; The Blackwell Encyclopedic Dictionary of Human Resource Management, 1998, pp. 252-3). Performance measurement and appraisal have several important functions, including ensuring the service quality. The appraisal system should help the employee to find the most suitable position for him/herself within the organisation.


LM 34,6/7

526

Performance appraisal is a process of work evaluation in the organisation that consists of the appraisal of positions and performance of each staff member. In the course of appraisal there are evaluated the management of the organisation and its structural units on one hand, and positions and performance of individuals who held these on the other. Linking the evaluation with the goals of the organisation and its structural units, and with the performance of the staff enables to motivate and acknowledge employees who deserve that, but also to point out shortcomings (Tu¨rk, 2005, pp. 183-251). Data collection The questionnaires were applied to 195 library professional staff members working in selected libraries. A total of 111 completed questionnaires were received back. The rate of receiving back was 57 per cent. The following data were collected about the respondents: age, sex, monthly income, the size of the household, the number of workers in the household, the length of employment at the library, the length of professional employment in total, professional status, education. Eight men and 103 women responded to the questionnaire. That kind of generic divide characterises Estonian library staff in general – most of all due to the low salary, librarianship has developed into the field of work predominantly for women. The most active respondents belonged to the age groups from 41 to 50 years (29 persons, that is, 26 per cent of respondents) and from 51 to 60 years (26 persons, 24 per cent), followed by the respondents from the age groups from 31 to 40 years (20 persons, 18 per cent), from 61 to 70 years (19 persons, 17 per cent), and from 21 to 30 years (16 persons, 14 per cent). Only one respondent fell into the age group from 71 to 81, that makes 1 per cent of respondents. The major part of respondents receive monthly income less than e500 (52 respondents, 47 per cent) or their income remains between e500 and 700 (47 respondents, 42 per cent). In total, ten respondents, that is, 9 per cent of the respondents receive monthly from e700 to 900 and only two respondents receive monthly income over e900. Most of the library staff members have a household of two or three persons – accordingly, 31 per cent and 26 per cent of the respondents. Of respondents 21 per cent reported that their household consisted of a single person and 18 per cent answered that the size of their household amounted to four persons. Only 4 per cent of the respondents reported that the size of their household was five or more persons. The percentage of sole breadwinners totalled to even 43 per cent of the respondents. The length of professional employment varied a lot. Of respondents 16 per cent had been professionally employed for five years, 6 per cent of respondents – for five to nine years, 32 per cent of respondents – for ten to 19 years, 23 per cent of the respondents – for 20 to 29 years, 18 per cent of the respondents – for 30 to 39 years, and 5 per cent of the respondents – from 40 to 49 years. Of the respondents 53 per cent have acquired academic degree or professional higher education in the field and 10 per cent reported to have a professional MA degree. Results The first two questions of the questionnaire’s D-part dealing with work performance measurement and appraisal where posed with a purpose to find out how the respondents define the concepts of performance and efficiency in the context of

libraries. In addition to that, the respondents’ opinion was asked of which factors hinder good performance. Allow us to present some examples of answers to the question: “In your opinion, what does efficiency mean in the context of libraries?”: . “In my mind efficiency in the context of libraries means that an optimal number of staff members have been engaged, who dedicate themselves to their work in the best possible way; they do not sit in their chairs and the situation, where employees feel themselves no-good as they have nothing to do, never occurs. They are motivated. They know their tasks. And every staff member has one’s area of responsibility. The cooperation between the departments is smooth.” . “When user satisfaction as regards to services and information is achieved with as less as possible manpower.” . “User satisfaction is guaranteed with as less resources as possible.” . “Efficiency in the context of libraries means for me that all employees consciously strive to achieve the desired results. At the same time, it presents the vital role of library management – clearly defined tangible unambiguous goals have been formulated.” . “The speed of service, availability of books and information.” . “The maximum possible result should be achieved using limited resources (e.g. serving maximum possible number of users with as minimum number of librarians as possible.” . “The provision of (information) services in the best possible way and of the best reasonable quality, using most minimum possible time and monetary resources. The emphasis is placed on the use of resources.” . “Efficiency should mean work organisation by which employees contribute to their best and get decently paid.” . “This concept embraces the speed of decision-making and staff members’ willingness to contribute. However, it also involves the organization of work and workplace in a way that it does not cause either excessive loss of time or queues. Efficiency is also high when people employed are competent.” . “The work done is clearly transparent to all and it might be measured.” . “High level of service culture.” . “Effectively using one’s working hours to carry out one’s tasks and fulfil one’s obligations.” . “How smooth is cooperation between colleagues while providing services.” A selection of answers to the question: “In your opinion, what does performance mean in the context of libraries?”: . “The indicator of the library’s performance is the user’s satisfaction with his/her library. Not solely the service department, but also the whole library contributes to achieving this goal. Depending on the specific library, the library might also fulfil other tasks than merely providing services to its users. Good performance means that all tasks have been completed.” . “The work is done, users satisfied, the library enjoys good reputation.” . “Performance – a successful achievement of set goals.”


LM 34,6/7

. .

.

528

.

.

. .

“A seamless performance.” “Striving to achieve the ultimate limit while reaching the goals and tasks of the organisation, involving the optimal contribution from each member of the staff.” “Performance is indicated via the user satisfaction with the library’s collections and attentive and quick service.” “It depends on the position/department. The performance of the service department might be, for instance, measured in the terms of the quickness of service and user satisfaction. On the other hand, the departments that process literature might show higher performance while processing more materials in a certain period of time, etc. And performance certainly depends on the general feeling of the employee and his/her motivation.” “Good performance is the improvement of all indicators: – the number of publications in the collection increases – the number of users grows – the public is satisfied with our work.” “As a result of all activities, the user satisfaction grows.” “It can be measured in the terms of abundance of users and their satisfaction.”

A selection of answers to the question: “Which factors hinder good performance?”: . “The lack of motivation – salary!!! Health condition.” . “The employees’ different abilities and willingness to work. If the employee is interested in the job, he/she will perform to one’s limits; if he/she goes to work only for the money, he/she will be fiddlening away one’s working hours with a minimum work output. The head of the structural unit knows without evaluation, how everybody works.” . “Working with several people in the same room.” . “Excessive workload in the service sector and the poor attitude toward service by the other departments (that sometimes inhibits the work motivation of service personnel).” . “Colleagues‘ poor work performance that prolongs the achievement of final results.” . “If people are not granted a possibility for in-house development and they have no motivation to work better.” . “Performance can be good, if you know, what your goal is. Sometimes the aims might be vague. ” . “Bad management.” . “The lack of skills/knowledge or motivation might hinder. Or if your work depends on somebody else’s decisions.” . “Fixed salary (that is, no better pay can be expected for better work results).” . “Internal strains in the workplace, bad in-house dissemination of information, low salaries.” . “The shortcomings of the working environment: street noise, lack of ventilation, too high air temperature in the office, too many employees (five) compressed into one room.”

“Sometimes there are too many employees engaged, so everybody is not actively involved all the time. A situation emerges, when some idle time occurs. Employees do not have enough responsibilities and their motivation vanishes, their skills diminish, and they degrade intellectually.” “Bad work organisation, unprofessional colleagues.”

Library employees’ attitudes

The replies revealed that the efficiency and performance in libraries are rather associated with service and user satisfaction, but at the same time with work organization, internal communication, the competence and professionalism of co-workers, motivation, and bad relations between performance and pay in Estonian university libraries. Similar factors also hinder good work performance – lack of motivation, low, fixed salary that has nothing to do with performance improvement, internal strains in the organization, bad internal communication and work organization, and also a so-called open working space, which a number of staff members have to share. Icasso (1985) arques that “If an organization is ever to have satisfied workers, management must, at least, minimize factors leading to job dissatisfaction. Staff spaces (working conditions) are a factor which can lead to job dissatisfaction” (Icasso, 1985, p. 27) and of course hinder good work performance as well. In attempt to establish whether the library in which the respondent works, systematically carries out performance evaluation or measures the effective use of working time, an interesting development occurred. That is, 38 per cent of the respondents were unable to confirm whether any systematic performance evaluation is carried out in their libraries, and 48 per cent of the respondents could not answer to the question whether their employer regularly measures the effective use of their working time (see Figures 1 and 2). It certainly is difficult to find a reason why so many respondents answered “Hard to say” to these two questions. Does it indicate that in Estonian libraries staff members are observed and the use of their working hours is being measured without their knowledge? It has been noted in professional literature that performance appraisal can be both formal and informal. The latter is, however, not recommended, as it is unsystematic and consists in constant evaluation of the staff by the management in the course of everyday work. Such appraisal generally is subjective and the employees do not consider the evaluation results reliable (e.g. Tu¨rk, 2005, p. 187; Yansey, 2000, p. 54). It may also discredit management. Even though it has been known that appraisal interviews are annually carried out in several Estonian research libraries, these do not

529

.

.

Figure 1. “Does your employer regularly measure the effective use of your working time?”

LM 34,6/7

530

Figure 2. “Whether any systematic performance appraisal is carried out in your library?”

Figure 3. “Is it possible to measure your performance?”

substitute for systematic performance measurement and appraisal. Or does the reason indeed lie in the fact that such an enormous amount of staff members do not care at all whether their performance is being appraised or their effective use of working hours measured? This aspect certainly needs further in-depth investigation. Approximately equal percentage of persons responded “Probably yes” and “Probably not” – correspondingly, 26 and 28 per cent – to the question: “Is it possible to measure your performance?”. A total of 12 per cent was of the opinion that their work performance can be measured (“Certainly yes”), and 6 per cent guessed it could not be measured (“Certainly not”). The rest of respondents hesitated and preferred to answer “Hard to say” (28 per cent) (see Figure 3). At the same time, the major part of respondents (41 þ 12 per cent) claims that the performance measurement and evaluation does not affect their self-esteem (see Figure 4). So it can be concluded that the staff of Estonian university libraries are ready for the measurement and appraisal of their performance. People want to get feedback on their value for the organisation. There are no grounds for the apprehension that appraisal would negatively affect the self-esteem of staff members. On the other hand, the individual performance measurement of each employee would make him/her strive for excellence, impels him/her to personal development and achieving better work results. The answers to two totally opposite questions – “Might performance measurement in libraries arise problems?” and “Does the library as a whole profit from performance measurement?” – were interesting indeed. As we can see from Figure 5, both questions predominantly received an answer “Hard to say” (correspondingly, 43 per cent and

41 per cent), almost the equal number of responses were “Probably yes” (correspondingly, 40 per cent and 39 per cent). 7 per cent of the respondents have presumed that performance measurement in libraries might raise problems, answering “Certainly yes”, and 13 per cent think that the library as a whole would profit from performance measurement, answering “Certainly yes”. The payment/remuneration system should support the realisation of the goals of the structural unit of the university – the research library. It should ensure employees with the work stimuli to make changes in their activities and personal development, and by this improving their performance in line with the mission and goals of the organisation (see Figure 6). Unfortunately, the staff of Estonian university libraries do not see any relation between performance improvement and their salary increase and career. Most of the respondents do not consider realistic that they would get a promotion and pay rise through improving their personal performance – 26 per cent and 39 per cent of the respondents do not hope to get salary increase, answering correspondingly “Certainly not” and “Probably not”, and accordingly 22 per cent and 37 per cent of the respondents do not expect to get a promotion. Only 6 per cent of the respondents, who answered to both questions, consider it probable that they would get salary increase and promotion via improving their work results. The fact that Estonian research libraries do not have formed evaluation system might cause the feeling of injustice, bringing along levelling, that is, central tendency, where top employees are


Figure 4. “Whether the performance measurement and appraisal does affect negatively to your self-esteem?“

Figure 5. Whether the respondents consider that the library as a whole profit from performance measurement and might performance measurement in libraries arise problems

LM 34,6/7

532

Figure 6. Whether the respondents believe their improvement in personal performance involve salary increase and promotion

Figure 7. The percentage of opinions whether performance appraisal help employees comprehend better kind of further training and education they should need and does performance appraisal provides them with information for better performance

remunerated approximately on the same level as those, who have worse work results. However, this constitutes one of the most vital demotivators (Tu¨rk, 2005). The employees are convinced that, in spite of their efforts, more effective work and improvement of performance, they still have no hope for pay rise or promotion. However, a number of respondents highly evaluated performance appraisal as a possible source of information and feedback for improving their performance and seeking out their further training and education needs – 31 per cent of the respondents gave an answer “Probably yes” to the question, whether performance evaluation might provide them with information for improving their performance, and 38 per cent of the respondents answered “Probably yes” to the question, whether performance measurement might help them to understand, what kind of further training and education they should need (see Figure 7). Ensuring, that library users like any other service organisation customers, will receive quality service, depends on both library donors as much as highly qualified, well organised and effective labour force. At the same time, the effectiveness and economic efficiency of services depend on financial possibilities of the library and on

the staff’s performance, on how effectively, efficiently and productively they make use of their working hours. While comparing the use of one’s working hours with their colleagues, the respondents evaluated their own performance rather effective – 35 per cent of the respondents answered that they work more effectively than their colleagues do. Of the respondents 5 per cent felt that they act like that “Often”, 5 per cent – “Seldom”, and 7 per cent – “Never” (see Figure 8). Nevertheless, a number of employees are annoyed, when their colleagues do not use their working hours effectively. Of the respondents 5 per cent claimed that it certainly annoys them, and 38 per cent – that it rather annoys them (see Figure 9). The answers to the question “In your opinion, is your performance better than your colleagues?” were remarkably more prudent. “Hard to say” answers prevailed, as 62 per cent of the respondents filled in this blank. Of the respondents 15 per cent presume that they probably work more effectively than their colleagues, and the same percentage of respondents feel that they probably do not (see Figure 10). However, 23 per cent of the respondents rather would be offended, if any of their colleagues might be considered more effective worker, and 3 per cent will be certainly offended. Correspondingly, 30 per cent and 18 per cent of the respondents would not consider almost (answering “Probably not”) or any harm done (answering “Certainly not”), while answering to the same question. A quarter of respondents would be offended, if their work should be considered less efficient than their colleagues’ output. Feedback on one’s work is extremely important. It is especially necessary for young and recently recruited employees, who do not yet have experience how to evaluate the level of their performance from the point-of-view of the organisation or, in a narrower sense, in the context of the department. It raises their self-esteem and confidence. By


Figure 8. “In your opinion, are you using your working hours more effectively than your colleagues?”

Figure 9. “Are you annoyed, if any of your colleagues does not use one’s working hours effectively?”

LM 34,6/7

534

the professional literature, feedback should be comprehensive or, so to say, covering 360 degrees; then it enables to get a reliable and all-round picture of work results. Evaluations provided by several appraisers, e.g. managerial staff and clients, are generally considered more plausible and that is why these have greater motivating effect (Tu¨rk, 2005, p. 190). The majority of the literature in library science has focused – and rightfully so – on the user: what do users and patrons want and/or need, how do they use it, how can librarians best provide it to them, do the users feel themselves comfortable in library building, etc. The user surveys, based on the SERQUAL methodology, widely conducted in Estonian research libraries during the past decade, however, only provide a general overview of the customer satisfaction or dissatisfaction with the work of service departments, available literature, and working environment in the library from the point-of-view of the user (see Figure 11). The direct supervisor is the most common and competent appraiser of job positions and employees, as he/she has the information and can constantly observed work processes. Nevertheless, he/she might be disturbed by prejudices that may give rise to deviations in objectivity. How about receiving feedback from direct supervisors in Estonian university libraries? More than a half, e.g. 54 per cent (13 þ 41 per cent) of respondents claim that they have received sufficient feedback on their performance and 23 per cent claim that they have not received sufficient feedback. Conclusions It has to be noted that the Estonian librarian’s passivity concerning answering the questionnaire was impressive. It is obvious that efficiency and performance are not the

Figure 10. The respondents’ opinions whether their performance is better than their colleagues and whether they offended, when their colleague’s performance is considered to be better than their own

Figure 11. “Have you received sufficient feedback from your direct supervisor on your performance?”

issues for library staff members to deeply ponder on; it can be even declared that these concepts are not culturally accepted in the Estonian librarianship. Not responding to the questionnaire was reasoned with the lack of time (especially by the service personnel). Several said that they do not dare to answer as they doubted in the anonymity of the questionnaire and, because of that, were afraid of later sanctions. Some mentioned that a number of questionnaires are carried out, but these bring about no tangible change. To take into account all of that, it should be considered a pretty good accomplishment that more thana half of librarians selected for the target group, participated. At the same time, it can be assumed that the part of the target group that responded constitute the part of the library staff which are most willing for teamwork and have a positive attitude towards life. Efficiency and performance are rather associated with service and user satisfaction in Estonian university libraries. The factors that hinder good performance are, on one hand, related to management – internal strains in the organisation, bad internal communication, etc. – and on the other hand, to immediate working environment – open working space, a number of employees in the single small workroom, etc. Diminishing the impact of factors that hinder good performance would certainly inspire librarians and qualified specialists. Libraries’ managerial staff should pay more attention to reliable internal communication, and relieving inner strains occurred in the working team in a delicate, but decisive manner. Open and/or too small working area also constitute a problem; however, the employees can be guaranteed more privacy by placing their desks in a smarter way. The staff members evaluate their use of working hours to be rather effective or more effective in comparison with their colleagues. A number of employees are annoyed, when their colleagues do not make effective use of their working hours. As for the library as a whole, performance appraisal is considered to be profitable; still it is assumed that it might raise problems. Nevertheless, it is claimed that performance appraisal does not have negative impact on the self-esteem of the employee. The general opinion is that improving one’s performance does not bring along either salary increase or promotion. The free-form answers to the question about what hinders work performance also exposed the fact that better performance does not imply pay rise. For that reason, the employees are not motivated to work more effectively and, by this, improve their work results. As today a so-called automatic career advancement has perished in most of the fields of work, then the librarians and specialists are more comfortable with the career model of an expert, that is, employees can only strive for excellence in their positions and improve their competence via various training courses and continuing education. Therefore, the major part of respondents takes the performance evaluation as a valuable feedback for improving their performance and seeking out their need for further training and education. Even though most of the respondents consider the feedback provided by their direct supervisors on their performance as sufficient, it is still an area to be developed. The percentage of answers “Hard to say” from all of the answers to almost all questions was surprisingly large. This can be reasoned by the modesty, culturally inherent to Estonians, managerial problems (for instance, distrust towards the management), or strains in the working team. The authors of the survey encourage the managerial staff of Estonian university libraries to develop evaluation systems based on library performance indicators and standards of international library statistics, and to draw necessary conclusions on the


LM 34,6/7

536

basis of evaluation results. Employees are convinced that their work performance can be measured and see no negative impact on their self-esteem. Although it has been expressed that performance measurement in libraries might cause problems, the performance measurement is considered to be useful for the library as a whole. Evaluations should be definitely related to payment?remuneration system and taken into account while building up training programmes and measures for better work organisation and improving work performance. Levelling of employees, that is central tendency, should be avoided as it does not allow to worthily appreciate top employees. References Agarwal, T. (2011), “Measuring effort in service organisations”, available at: http://www. vantedge.in/uploads/4/5/2/7/4527963/measuring_effort_in_service_organisations.pdf (accessed 17 August 2012). Austin, J.T., Villanova, P. and Kane, J.S. (1991), “Construct validation of performance measures: definitional issues, development, and evaluation of indicators”, Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management, JAI Press, Greenwich, CT. Chimato, M.C. (2009), “How an economic crisis may improve your management skills: strategies for making it through uncertain times”, College & Research Library News, Vol. 70 No. 6, pp. 342-344. Doore Van, W., Bouckaert, G. and Halligan, J. (2010), “Defining the concepts”, Performance Management in the Public Sector, Routledge, London, pp. 16-36. Icasso, J.M. (1985), “Work spaces, satisfaction and productivity in libraries”, Library Journal, No 1, pp. 27-30. Kuvaas, B. (2006), “Performance appraisal satisfaction and employee outcomes: mediating and moderating roles of work motivation”, International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 17 No. 3, pp. 504-522. Maier, N.R.F. (1955), Psychology in Industry, Houghton-Mifflin, Boston, MA. Murray, R. (1999), “Job satisfaction of professional and paraprofessional library staff at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill”, Master’s paper for the MS in LS degree. Rantanen, H. (1995), The Effects of Productivity on Profitability: a Case Study at Firm Level Using an Activity-based Costing Approach, Lappeenranta University of Technology, Lappeenranta. Sonnentag, S. and Frese, M. (2002), “Performance concepts and performance theory”, Psychological Management of Individual Performance, John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY, pp. 3-26. The Blackwell Encyclopedic Dictionary of Human Resource Management (1998) in Peters, L.H., Greer, C.R. and Youngblood, S.A. (Eds), Blackwell, Malden, MA and Oxford. The Blackwell Encyclopedic Dictionary of Organizational Behavior (1998) in Schuler, R.S. and Van de Ven, A.H. (Eds), Blackwell, Malden, MA and Oxford. ¨ likooli Tu¨rk, K. (2005), Inimressursi juhtimine (Human Resource Management), Tartu U Kirjastus, Tartu. Van Scotter, J.R., Van Motovidlo, S.J. and Cross, T.C. (2000), “Effect of task performance and contextual performance on systematic rewards”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 84 No. 4, pp. 526-535. Vrat, P., Sardana, G.D. and Sahay, B.S. (2009), Productivity Measurement for Business Excellence, Alpha Science International, India.

Vroom, V.H. (1964), Work and Motivation, Wiley, New York, NY. White, R.D. (1999), “More than an analytical tool. Examining the ideological role of efficiency”, Public Productivity & Management Review, Vol. 25 No. 1, pp. 8-23. Witzel, M. (2002), “A short history of efficiency”, Business Strategy Review, Vol. 13 No. 4, pp. 38-47. Yansey, G. (2000), “Painless process”, Credit Union Management, Vol. 24 No. 12, pp. 54-62. Further reading Arnold, J. and Schoonman, W. (2002), “Maintaining and enhancing motivation as a contribution to organizational effectiveness”, Organizational Effectiveness: The Role of Psychology, John Wiley & Sons, Chichester, pp. 159-180. Tepp, M. (2010), “Kuidas firmas ka¨hku efektiivsust to˜sta? (How quickly to increase the companys’ effectiveness)”, Director, Vol. 2, p. 48. About the authors Kate-Riin Kont graduated from the Department of Librarianship and Information Science, Tallinn University in 1995; she earned an MA from the same department in 2004. Since 2009, she has been involved in doctoral studies at Tallinn University. Currently she works as Head of the Acquisitions Department of the Tallinn University of Technology Library. Research topics: university libraries, management, benchmarking, library services, scholarly communication, financing, expenditure, employees’ attitudes, performance measurement, performance appraisal, effectiveness, performance indicators, library statistics, cost accounting, time-driven activity-based costing, and managerial accounting. Kate-Riin Kont is the corresponding author and can be contacted at: [email protected] Signe Jantson graduated from the Department of Librarianship and Information Science, Tallinn University in 1996; she earned an MA from the same department in 2004. Since 2005, she has been involved in doctoral studies at Tallinn University, Institute for Information Science and since 2010 at Tallinn University of Technology, School of Economic and Business Administration. Currently she works as Head of the Bibliographic Department of the Tallinn University of Technology Library. Research topics: book history, book trade history, book selling history, publishing history, university libraries, management, benchmarking, library services, scholarly communication, financing, expenditure, employees’ attitudes, performance measurement, effectiveness, cost accounting, time-driven activity-based costing, and managerial accounting.

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: [email protected] Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints
