SPEC Kit 322: Library User Experience · 47
web pages and shared with key stakeholders. Teams all provided formal report-back sessions to staff in Libraries and
Cultural Resources. Learning Services team shared findings in a presentation to the 5th Canadian Learning Commons
Conference.
Hard to answer this question. Some of the results will be directly communicated with the public (we have a “We Heard
You” poster campaign every couple of years to highlight what we’ve changed based on LibQUAL+® results, we have
written reports of the results, in some cases, we’ve written articles about the various projects). We don’t have to file a
report on the activity with a particular office.
Information on the decision-making process and design has been shared broadly throughout the university and
governing board.
Information was shared with library staff, colleges, students union, as well as other libraries. This information was
shared via meetings and will also be communicated on the library website.
Institutional Research Planning with a report and PowerPoint, if needed.
Library Administrative Council received a full written, as well as oral, report. All library employees received a brief oral
report at a Town Meeting. The study report is posted on our intranet where anyone employed by the library can access
the full report.
Library Development Advisory Board, Library Renovation Committee, University Faculty Senate Library Committee will
be kept informed and/or assessed for ideas by use of meetings, e-mail, correspondence, and possibly videos or CD-
ROMs.
Library management council: presentation and written report.
Library of Congress Executive Committee and Management.
Library staff and advisory committee by direct presentation. Results placed in institutional repository for public access.
Library staff, faculty, Deans, Provost, library supporters.
Other institutions have requested information via e-mail. Library administration: via paper report and presentations.
Library staff: via presentations at town hall and other group meetings. Development team working on the user interface:
via reports and meetings.
Plans are underway to share results via our website and Facebook site.
Presentation of results at professional conferences.
Public website, Annual Report of the University Librarian to Senate, library advisory committees, Planning &Institutional
Research (President’s Office), newsletters.
Report is posted on the website/blog. Presentations on campus and at professional meetings.
Reports to the Foundation Board, internal agency reports, using Twitter when new activities are created, alerting
workshop participants, etc.
Results are available to library staff in narrative and quantitative form, collected on the Penn library staff web. Results
have also been communicated at department head and administrative meetings, as well as public services meetings and
forums open to all staff. There is some discussion about publishing the results more broadly, e.g., in an academic article.
Results are communicated to the appropriate user group.
web pages and shared with key stakeholders. Teams all provided formal report-back sessions to staff in Libraries and
Cultural Resources. Learning Services team shared findings in a presentation to the 5th Canadian Learning Commons
Conference.
Hard to answer this question. Some of the results will be directly communicated with the public (we have a “We Heard
You” poster campaign every couple of years to highlight what we’ve changed based on LibQUAL+® results, we have
written reports of the results, in some cases, we’ve written articles about the various projects). We don’t have to file a
report on the activity with a particular office.
Information on the decision-making process and design has been shared broadly throughout the university and
governing board.
Information was shared with library staff, colleges, students union, as well as other libraries. This information was
shared via meetings and will also be communicated on the library website.
Institutional Research Planning with a report and PowerPoint, if needed.
Library Administrative Council received a full written, as well as oral, report. All library employees received a brief oral
report at a Town Meeting. The study report is posted on our intranet where anyone employed by the library can access
the full report.
Library Development Advisory Board, Library Renovation Committee, University Faculty Senate Library Committee will
be kept informed and/or assessed for ideas by use of meetings, e-mail, correspondence, and possibly videos or CD-
ROMs.
Library management council: presentation and written report.
Library of Congress Executive Committee and Management.
Library staff and advisory committee by direct presentation. Results placed in institutional repository for public access.
Library staff, faculty, Deans, Provost, library supporters.
Other institutions have requested information via e-mail. Library administration: via paper report and presentations.
Library staff: via presentations at town hall and other group meetings. Development team working on the user interface:
via reports and meetings.
Plans are underway to share results via our website and Facebook site.
Presentation of results at professional conferences.
Public website, Annual Report of the University Librarian to Senate, library advisory committees, Planning &Institutional
Research (President’s Office), newsletters.
Report is posted on the website/blog. Presentations on campus and at professional meetings.
Reports to the Foundation Board, internal agency reports, using Twitter when new activities are created, alerting
workshop participants, etc.
Results are available to library staff in narrative and quantitative form, collected on the Penn library staff web. Results
have also been communicated at department head and administrative meetings, as well as public services meetings and
forums open to all staff. There is some discussion about publishing the results more broadly, e.g., in an academic article.
Results are communicated to the appropriate user group.
