The first recommendation to come from this study was that LAUs need to review their PM processes in order to ascertain whether needed or required PM information is effectively collected and reported to all appropriate re- cipients. The review should include stakeholders, customers, partners or program collaborators, and individuals or organizations with PM expertise and be performed regularly to allow for timely corrective feedback of the effectiveness of the PM process. The review should ensure that the PM process is connected to all other aspects of the organization and its proc- esses.
LARRY NASH WHITE 118
After the PM process review, HLA and LAU staff should be provided an increased knowledge and understanding of PM use through the provision of training and practicums specifically designed to meet the requirements of the revised PM process in their LAU. Appropriate technologies should be im- plemented, with appropriate training, to minimize resource consumption, while maximizing potential strategic and community impact value of the PM process. The results of the HLA PM process review will provide gov- erning bodies, stakeholders, partners, and program collaborators with an increased knowledge and understanding of the PM process through im- proved direct communication and reporting of required PM information between all PM process participants. Appropriate technologies should be implemented to maximize stakeholder and community awareness of the strategic needs, accomplishments, and value of the LAU.
The second recommendation was to review existing PM information management processes within the LAU, including the communication and reporting of PM information, participants and roles in the PM information management processes, and selecting and aligning PM needs among par- ticipants. Identify areas of improvement and initiate regular reviews of the process to allow for corrective feedback.
To reduce the amount of incorrect or unnecessary data collected, the LAU should integrate existing and future information management systems with PM information management processes and resources.
The researcher revised the initial PM model using the study findings and Purpose I conclusions. The revised PM model is illustrated inFig. 3.
In the revised PM process model, the information flows (red lines) were adjusted to account for the study findings of the use of PM information. The empty triangles in the revised model indicate an inconsistent or diminished flow of PM information to the ‘‘Planning and Acquisition’’ and ‘‘Outputs’’
components of the model. The ‘‘Evaluation’’ component of the model re- ceives no PM information, while the ‘‘Resources’’ and ‘‘Activities’’ compo- nents of the model receive the majority of the PM information produced in the process.
In the literature review of this study, four theoretical factors were iden- tified as sources of problems in the PM process in libraries: a lack of con- sensus as to the types and value of PM, a lack of understanding of how to use and interpret PM information, organizational structures and cultures im- peding the PM process, and a lack of precision in the PM process. Evidence was found to indicate that all four theoretical problem factors currently exist in the PM process of Florida public libraries. All of these problem factors impede the creation and operation of a PM in Florida public libraries.
A majority of respondents perceived little change would occur in their PM use and impact over the next three years, though several respondents iden- tified social and political changes in their community as affecting their PM process in the future. The majority of respondents perceived output-oriented
Fig. 3. Revised Performance Measurement (PM) Process Model.
LARRY NASH WHITE 120
measures used in their LAU would continue to be more effective to use than newer performance measures over the next three years.
The study findings indicated that a significant number of respondents lacked an understanding of or commitment to the use of PM and the man- agement of the resulting PM information. Because of this lack of under- standing or commitment, a majority of respondents did not support a library culture, which values the PM process or the resulting information or value. The lack of a culture that supports the PM process may be respon- sible for an apparent lack of understanding or communication of PM in- formation needs of stakeholders and partners, the lack of process and value alignment in the overall PM process, the negative perceptions of impact from using PM, the lack of priority in conducting PM, and the allotment of resources allocated to conducting PM.
The third recommendation was that statewide and regional library agen- cies, i.e. the State Library, Florida Library Association, and multitype li- brary cooperatives, and leaders should undertake to improve their understanding of the PM process, the management of the resulting PM information, and their combined strategic and community impact value.
Positively conveying and demonstrating the importance and value of a cul- ture of assessment in all organizational activities could achieve this under- standing. The results would formulate the foundation required to develop a culture of assessment that fits Florida public libraries’ needs. HLA should then exemplify the values of the culture of assessment as described by Lakos, i.e. ‘‘walk the walk, and talk the talk.’’ By providing support and leadership for the PM process and its use in their LAU, the HLA’s commitment, perceptions, and values will lead the drive toward the implementation and adoption of the culture of assessment in their LAU.
To ensure that PM training and education are provided to all Florida library staff, the regional and state agencies libraries should provide con- tinuing education opportunities in the area of PM to library practioners and their stakeholders. The PM process and results will more closely align with desired organizational outcomes and their reporting as the understanding of the PM process and the potential derived value becomes better appreciated by both practioners and stakeholders. Corresponding to the educational opportunities for practioners, students and prospective practioners in li- brary and information studies programs entering the profession need an improved understanding of the practical application of evaluation theories, measures, developments, and the PM process. Many graduates of library and information studies programs immediately become HLA or are re- quired to perform administrative functions, such as performance evaluation
upon entry into the profession. Ensuring their understanding of current practices and future developments will allow new professionals to acclimate more readily into a culture of assessment, and/or to initiate or support a culture of assessment in their workplace.
Researchers in the profession should provide direction and guidance to practioners in investigating and improving the understanding and operation of the PM process and the culture of assessment. Research efforts and results should support the development of future PM processes and the culture of assessment. Expanding the research into PM would provide needed resources for practioners and students to better understand the practical application of PM and the dynamics of a culture of assessment.