• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Science & Technology Libraries >Editorial Rant: Service Contracts
【24h】

Editorial Rant: Service Contracts

机译：编辑Rant：服务合同

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Libraries are more than ever being held accountable for the best use of their resources. Return on investment is a buzz phrase throughout the corporate world, and this holds true in academic settings as well. In order to demonstrate excellent performance, libraries must perform measurable, evidence-based evaluation. This process requires clearly stated goals and expectations. Evaluation has traditionally been based upon subjective user satisfaction-using either simple opinions and/or gap analysis between priority services and perceived performance. Advanced evaluation must also include quantifiable tests, and this means we need industry benchmarks and standards. Yes, individual situations might require modifications to normal benchmarks based upon factors such as multi-tasking personnel, economies of scale, and other local requirements, but this fuzziness is no reason to not use any measurable factors in service quality improvement initiatives.
机译：图书馆比以往任何时候都承担着更好地利用其资源的责任。投资回报率是整个企业界的流行语，在学术环境中也是如此。为了展示出色的性能，图书馆必须执行可衡量的，基于证据的评估。此过程需要明确说明的目标和期望。传统上，评估是基于主观用户满意度-使用简单的意见和/或优先服务与感知性能之间的差距分析。高级评估还必须包括可量化的测试，这意味着我们需要行业基准和标准。是的，个别情况可能需要根据多任务人员，规模经济和其他本地要求等因素对正常基准进行修改，但是这种模糊性并非没有理由在服务质量改善计划中不使用任何可衡量的因素。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号