蔡欣如

隨著大環境的改變，圖書館所要面對的挑戰漸增。為了使圖書館能符合讀者的需求，並在科技快速進步的衝擊下，持續提供高效與高品質的服務，實有必要建立績效評估的機制。本研究主要目的為研析出重要性及可行性較高之大專校院圖書館績效指標，並了解影響大專校院圖書館執行績效評估之困難因素，以供大專校院圖書館實踐績效評估的參考。本研究以全國大專校院圖書館為研究對象，利用王怡璇、劉宜臻、柯皓仁（2012）所歸納之大學圖書館績效指標，進行問卷調查，以了解大專校院圖書館績效指標之重要程度與可執行程度，共放發162 份問卷，回收109 份有效問卷。本研究重要發現總結如下：(1) 關於圖書館開放時間、館藏資源充分性與可得性、圖書館人力資源配置、館藏資源使用率、讀者滿意度、館際互借速度、參考問題回覆滿足率、經費等指標之重要程度較高；(2) 影響指標可執行程度的因素包含指標評估方式複雜、資料取得不易、績效指標達成不易等；(3) 時間與經費資源不足為國內大專校院圖書館實踐績效評估的主要困難。本研究依據研究結果提出以下建議：(1) 加強推動大專校院圖書館績效評估；(2) 舉辦績效評估研習與交流活動；(3) 全面施行全國大專校院圖書館績效評估。

Facing a new century of highly competitiveness and challenges, libraries have to pursue distinguished service quality for meeting patron needs. Establishing a mechanism of performance measurement, libraries can continuously self-examine their service quality, and present their achievements to their patrons, parent institutions, and funding institutions. It is essential to have a standardized and universal guideline for the practical implementation of performance measurement. In view of this, this study aims at analyzing and developing a set of feasible performance indicators for academic libraries as well as comprehending performance measurement difficulties. Wang, Liu & Ke (2012) integrated existing library performance measurement standards (like ISO 11620:2008) and related projects (like BIX) to propose a total of 59 performance indicators. This study is a followup research of their study. Using a questionnaire survey, this study collected the opinions of academic libraries in Taiwan about the ideally important and practically feasible performance indicators. A total of 162 copies of questionnaire were distributed and 109 copies were returned. The research results are shown as follows. First, the performance indicators about library opening hours, the adequacy and availability of collections, librarian manpower allocation, collections usage, patron satisfaction, interlibrary loan speed, reference fill rate, and budget allocation were more important than others. Second, less feasible indicators possessed features such as high computation cost, difficulty to obtain data, and difficulty to accomplish good achievement. Third, time and budget were the primary reasons that academic libraries did not conduct performance measurement regularly. Suggestions for academic libraries were drawn, based on the conclusion of this study. First, the performance measurement for academic libraries should be promoted further. Second, more activities for librarians to learn about performance measurement could be conducted. Third, a nationwide performance measurement for all academic libraries should be implemented in the long run.