10 - Chapter 4

80
CHAPTER IV
ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA
This Research is concerned with “A Study on Total Quality
Management of University Libraries in Tamil Nadu". This analysis is based on
the data collected through questionnaire from The target group of this study
includes library users and library professionals of the Five State Government
run University libraries in Tamilnadu such as: 1. Alagappa University Central
Library, Karaikudi, 2. Bharathiyar University Central Library, Coimbatore,3.
Madurai Kamaraj University Central Library(Dr.T.P.M.Library), 4.
Manonmaniam Sundaranar University Central Library,Tirunelveli, 5.
University of Madras Central Library,Chennai. This chapter deals with the
analysis and interpretation of collected data by employing appropriate
statistical tools and techniques wherever necessary. Further this chapter is
divided into two sections.
Section-1 discusses data collected from the users of the university
Libraries. This chapter discusses the general features of respondents.
Section-II explains data collected from the University Library
professionals.
81
SECTION- I
Table 4.1
Demographic characteristics of Library users –Gender and Age
No.of
Particulars Percentage
Respondents
Gender Male 256 51.2
Female 244 48.8
Total 500 100
Age 20- 25 years 342 68.4
26- 30 81 16.2
31-35 39 7.8
36-40 31 6.2
41 and above 7 1.4
Total 500 100
Source:Primary data
Table 4. 1 shows the Demographic characteristics of Library users. In
this study, 51.2% of the respondents belong to the category of male whereas
48.8% of the respondents belong to the category of female. Hence most of
the respondents belong to the category of male who use the University
Libraries in Tamilnadu.
82
Among the overall 500 library users, 68.4% of the respondents belong
to the category of age 20- 25 years, 16.2% of the respondents belong to the
category of age 26-30, 7.8% of the respondents belong to 31-35 and 6.2%
belong to 36-40 and 1.4% belong to 41 and above age category respectively.
Hence most of the respondents belong to the age category of 20-25 years. It
also suggests that the University library authority should attract all age
category of users to use the university library.

83
Figure: 4.1
Demographic characteristics of Library users –Gender and Age

84
Table 4. 2
Demographic characteristics of Library users –Marital status and
Residing sector
No.of
Respondents
19.8
Marital status Married 99
80.2
Unmarried 401
100
Total 500
Residing
Rural 352 70.4
sector
Urban 148 29.6
100
Total 500
Source:Primary data
Table 4.2 describes the Demographic characteristics of Library users
such as Marital status and Residing sector. In this study, Ninety nine
respondents (19.8%) belong to the category of married whereas 401
respondents (80.2%) belong to unmarried. Hence most of the respondents
belong to the category of unmarried who use the university libraries.
Among the overall 500 respondents, 70.4% of the respondents belong
to the area of rural category and 29.6% belong to the area of urban category.
Hence most of the respondents belong to the rural category. It also suggests
that the university authority should consider the needs of the rural area users
who use the university library.

85
Table 4.3
Demographic characteristics of Library users –Qualification and Status
No.of
Respondents
Qualification PG 309 61.8
M.Phil 128 25.6
Ph.D 42 8.4
Others 21 04.2
Total 500 100
Status Faculty Member 28 5.6
M.Phil Scholar 93 18.6
Ph.D Scholar 70 14
First year
147 29.4
Students
Second year
162 32.4
Students
Total 500 100
Source:Primary data
Table 4.3 describes Demographic characteristics of Library users such
as Qualification and status.In this study, among the overall 500 respondents,
61.8% of the library users belong to PG qualification, 25.6% belong to M.Phil
qualification and 8.4% belong to Ph.D qualification. Hence most of Post
graduate respondents use the university libraries.

86
Among the overall 500 library users, twenty eight respondents (5.6%)
are faculty members, 18.6% are M.Phil research scholars, 14% of the
respondents are Ph.D research scholars, 29.4% are first year PG students
and 32.4% are second year PG students respectively. Hence more than three
fifth of the respondents belong to the category of PG Students who use the
university library services.
Table 4.4
Frequency of visit to the Library
No.of
S.No. Frequency Percentage
Respondents
1. Every day 253 50.6
2. Once in two days 41 8.2
3. Once in three days 43 8.6
4. Weekly 107 21.4
5. Monthly 31 6.2
6. Occasionally 25 5
7. Others - -
Total 500 100
Source: Primary data
Table 4.4 shows that 50.6% of the respondents visit the library
everyday, 8.2% of the respondents visit the library once in two days, 8.6% of
87
the respondents visit once in three days, 21.4% visit weekly, 6.2% visit
monthly 5% visit occasionally. Hence half of the respondents visit regularly in
the university libraries. It also suggests that the university library authority
encourage all the users to use the university library regularly.

88
Table 4.5
Status of the library users and their frequency of visit to the library
Frequency of visit the library

Status of the
S.No. Once in Once in Total
users Every day Weekly Monthly Occasionally
two days three days
1. Faculty 13 - 6 - 6 3 28
members (46.43%) (21.43%) (21.43%) (10.71%)
2. M.Phil Research 57 9 2 14 7 4 93
Scholars (61.29%) (9.68%) (2.15%) (15.05%) (7.53%) (4.30%)
3. Ph.D Research 25 14 4 21 4 2 70
Scholars (35.71%) (20%) (5.71%) (30%) (5.71%) (2.86%)
4. P.G..First year 78 5 12 40 6 6 147

Students (53.06%) (3.40%) (8.18%) (27.22%) (4.08%) (4.08%)
5 P.G..Second 80 13 19 32 8 10 162
year Students (49.38%) (8.02%) (11.73%) (19.75%) (4.94%) (6.17%)
Total 253 41 43 107 31 25 500

89
Table 4. 5 shows the status of the library users and their frequency of
visiting the library. Among the faculty members, 46.43% visit the library every
day, 21.43% visit once in three days and 21.43% visit monthly. Hence nearly
half of the faculty members visit the university library daily. Among the M.Phil
research scholars, 61.29% visit every day,9.68% visit once in two days,
2.15% visit once in three days, 15.05% visit weekly,7.53% visit monthly and
4.30% visit occasionally. Therefore three fourth of the M.Phil research
scholars visit the university library daily. Among the Ph.D research scholars,
35.71% visit every day, 20% visit once in two days, 5.71% visit once in three
days, 30% visit weekly,5.71% monthly and 2.86% visit occasionally. Hence
more than one third of the Ph.D research scholars visit the university library
daily. Among the Post graduate first year students, 53.06% visit every day,
3.40% visit once in two days, 8.18% visit once in three days, 27.22% visit
weekly,4.08% visit monthly and 4.08% visit occasionally. Hence more than
half of the Post Graduate first year students visit the university central library.
Among the Post graduate second year students, 49.38% visit every day,
8.08% visit once in two days, 11.73% visit once in three days, 19.75% visit
weekly,4.94% visit monthly and 6.17% visit occasionally. Hence nearly half of
the post graduate second year students visit the university central library.
90
Table 4.6
Time spent for searching information
No.of
S.No. Hours Percentage
Respondents
1. Less than 5 hrs 377 75.4
2. 06-10 hrs 89 17.8
3. 11-20 hrs 23 4.6
4. More than 20 hrs 11 2.2
Total 500 100
Table 4.6 shows the time spent for Information searching per week by
the respondents who use the university libraries. In this study, 75.4% of the
respondents report that they spent less than 5 hours for information searching
in the university libraries, 17.8% of the respondents report that 6-10 hours,
4.6% report that 11-20 hours and 2.2% of the respondents report that they
spent more than 20 hours per week for information searching in the university
libraries. Hence most the respondents spent less than 5 hours per week for
searching the information in the library.

91
Figure 4.2
Time spent for searching information

92
Table 4.7
Chi-square analysis among the male and female library users and
their Information searching per hour per week in the University
libraries
Infn.Searching
Less More
06-10 11-20
S.No. than 5 than 20 Total
hours hours
hours hours
Gender
188 48 13 7
1. Male 256
(73.44%) (18.75%) (5.08%) (2.73%)
189 41 10 4
2. Female 244
(77.46%) (16.80%) (4.09%) (1.64%)
Total 377 89 23 11 500
Source: Primary data Chi-square value- 1.48 df- 3
Table 4.7 elicits that Gender and Information searching per week in the
University libraries of the respondents. Among the overall 256 male
users,73.44% of the male users spent less than 5 hours per week for
information searching, 18.75% for 6-10 hours, 5.08% for 11-20 hours and
2,73% spent for more than 20 hours. Hence majority of the library male users
spent less than 5 hours for information searching in the university libraries.
Among the overall 244 female library users, 77.46% of the male users spent
less than 5 hours per week for information searching, 16.80% for 6-10 hours,
4.09% for 11-20 hours and 1.64% spent for more than 20 hours. Hence
majority of the library female users spent less than 5 hours for information
searching in the university libraries. It also suggests that the authority should
encourage the users to use the library for more hours for information
93
searching. The Library authority also provides more infrastructure for the
benefit of the library users to spend more hours in the library building.
Testing of Hypothesis 1
Ho: Null Hypothesis
There is no association between the Gender of the library users and their
information searching per week in the University libraries
H1: Alternative Hypothesis
There is an association between the Gender and the information searching
per week in the University libraries by the Library users.
Chi-Square Summary Result
Chi-Square
Degrees of Chi-Square Table Value
Calculated
Freedom 5%
Value
1.48 3 7.815
The table value of for 3 degrees of freedom at 5% level of
significance is 7.815.The calculated value of is less than this table value
and hence the Null hypothesis is accepted and hence Alternative hypothesis
is rejected. It is concluded that there is no association between the Gender
and the category of Internet skills of the Respondents.

94
Table 4.8
Time spent for Information gathering per week
No.of
Respondents
1. Less than 5 hrs 330 66
2. 06-10 hrs 124 24.8
3. 11-20 hrs 34 6.8
Total 500 100
Table 4.8 shows the time spent for Information gathering per week by
the respondents who use the university libraries. In this study, 66% of the
respondents report that they spent less than 5 hours for information gathering
in the university libraries, 24.8% of the respondents report that 6-10 hours,
6.8% report that 11-20 hours and 2.4% of the respondents report that they
spent more than 20 hours per week for information gathering in the university
libraries. Hence most the respondents spent less than 5 hours for Information
gathering in the library.

95
Table 4.9
Time spent for reading per week
No.of
Respondents
2. 06-10 hrs 74 14.8
3. 11-20 hrs 45 9
Total 500 100
Table 4.9 shows the time spent for Reading per week by the
respondents who use the university libraries. In this study, 69.8% of the
respondents report that they spent less than 5 hours for reading in the
university libraries, 14.8% of the respondents report that 6-10 hours, 9%
report that 11-20 hours and 6.4% of the respondents report that they spent
more than 20 hours per week for reading in the university libraries. Hence
most the respondents spent less than 5 hours for reading the information in
the library.
96
Table: 4. 10
Time spent for online information retrieval per week
No.of
Respondents
2. 06-10 hrs 85 17
3. 11-20 hrs 23 4.6
Total 500 100
Table 4.10 shows that 74.2% of the respondents report that they spent
less than 5 hours for online information retrieval in the university libraries,
17% of the respondents report that 6-10 hours, 4.6% report that 11-20 hours
and 4.2% of the respondents report that they spent more than 20 hours per
week for online information retrieval in the university libraries. Hence most
the respondents spent less than 5 hours for online information retrieval in the
library.
97
Figure 4.3
Time spent for online information retrieval per week

98
Table 4. 11
Time spent on Internet per day
No.of
Respondents
1. 30 minutes 163 32.6
2. One hour 185 37
3. Two hours 77 15.4
4. Three hours 18 3.6
5. More than three hours 57 11.4
Total 500 100
Table 4.11 elicits that 32.6% of the respondents report that they spent
30 minutes for internet in the university libraries, 37% of the respondents
report that one hour, 15.4% report that two hours and 3.6% of the
respondents report that three hours and 11.4% report that they spent more
than three hours per day for internet respectively. Hence most the
respondents spent an hour for using Internet in the library. It also suggests
that the library professionals should encourage the users to use the internet
for more hours.

99
Table 4.12
Time spent on Internet per day among the University Library users
Time
More
30
S.No 1 hr 2hrs 3hrs than 3 Tot
Minutes
University hrs
Library
33 44 16 7
1. ALU - 100
(33) (44) (16) (7)
24 50 8 2 16
2. BU 100
(24) (50) (8) (2) (16)
61 23 10 6
3 UM - 100
(61) (23) (10) (6)
13 38 19 13 17
4 MKU 100
(13) (38) (19) (13) (17)
32 30 24 3 11
5 MSU 100
(32) (30) (24) (3) (11)
163 185 77 18 57 500
(The figure in the parenthesis represents the percentage)
Table 4.12 discusses that 33% of the Alagappa University Library users spent
30 minutes for use on the Internet per day, 44% spent an hour per day,16%
spent 2 hours per day and 7% spent more than 3 hours per day. Hence most
of the Alagappa University Library users spent an hour for use of the Internet
in the library. Among the overall Bharathiyar University Library users, 24%
spent 30 minutes for use of the Internet, 50% for an hour, 8% for 2 hours, 2%
for three hours and 16% for more than 3 hours per day for use of the Internet.
Hence most of the Bharathiyar University Library users spent an hour for use
of the Internet in the library. Among the overall Madras University Library
100
users, 61% spent 30 minutes for use of the Internet, 23% for an hour, 10%
for 2 hours and 6% for more than 3 hours per day for use of the Internet.
Hence most of the Madras University Library users spent 30 minutes for use
of the Internet in the library. Among the overall Madurai Kamaraj University
Library users, 13% spent 30 minutes for use of the Internet, 38% for an hour,
19% for 2 hours, 13% for three hours and 17% for more than 3 hours per day
for use of the Internet. Hence most of the Madurai Kamaraj University Library
users spent an hour for use of the Internet in the library. Among the overall
Manonmaniam Sundaranar University Library users , 32% spent 30 minutes
for use of the Internet, 30% for an hour, 24% for 2 hours, 3% for three hours
and 11% for more than 3 hours per day for use of the Internet. Hence most
of the Manonmaniam Sundaranar University Library users spent thirty minutes
for use of the Internet in the library.

101
Table 4.13
Chi-square analysis of Marital Status of the library users and the time
spent on Internet per day
Time
More
30
S.No 1 hr 2hrs 3hrs than 3 Tot
Minutes
Marital hrs
status
42 17 19 5 16
1. Married 99
(42.42) (17.17) (19.19) (5.05) (16.16)
121 168 58 13 41
2. Unmarried 401
(30.17) (41.89) (14.46) (3.24) (10.22)
163 185 77 18 57 500
Table 4.13 shows the Marital Status of the library users and the time
spent Internet per day. In this study, 42.42% of the married users of library
spent 30 minutes for using the Internet, 17.17% spent about 1 hour, 19.19%
spent 2 hours, 5.05% spent 3 hours and 16.16% of the married users spent
more than 3 hours for using the Internet. Among the total 401 unmarried library
users, 30.17% spent 30 minutes per day, 41.89% spent an hour, 14.46% spent
2 hours,3.24% spent 3 hours and 10.22% spent more than 3 hours per day for
using the Internet. Hence the majority of the married users spent 30 minutes
per day and the majority of the unmarried users spent an hour per day for
using the Internet.

102
Ho: Null Hypothesis
There is no association between the Marital Status of the library users and
their time spent on Internet per day.
There is an association between the Marital Status of the library users and
their time spent on Internet per day.
Chi-Square Chi-Square Table

Degrees of Freedom
Calculated Value Value 5%
21.101 4 9.488
significance is 9.488.The calculated value of is higher than this table
value and hence the Null hypothesis is rejected and hence Alternative
hypothesis is accepted. It is concluded that there is an association between
Marital Status of the library users and their time spent on Internet per day.
103
Table 4.14
Membership Details
No.of
S.No. Membership Percentage
Respondents
1. Yes 207 41.4
2. No 293 58.6
Total 500 100
Table 4.14 shows the membership details of the library. In this study,
41.4% of the respondents are the members of the university library whereas
58.6% of the respondents are the non members of the university library.
Hence the University Library authorities encourage the non member users to
become the members of the university library.

104
Table 4.15
Purpose of Visit to the Library
No.of
S.No. Purpose Percentage
Respondents
To know the latest arrivals in the
1. 146 29.2
library in your subject
2. Academic improvement 188 37.6
3. Reading newspaper 162 32.4
4. Prepare competitive Examination 154 30.8
To gain current and general

5. 156 31.2
information
6. Reading Journals and magazines 148 29.6
7. For leisure reading 100 20
Preparation of class notes/

8. 114 22.8
assignments/ seminar papers
9. Employment news 8 1.6
10. Others - -
Total N=500
Table 4.15 elicits the purpose of visit to the university libraries. In this
study, 29.2% of the respondents use the university library to know the latest
arrivals in the library in their subject, 37.6% of the respondents visit the library
for their academic improvement, 32.4% visit for reading newspapers. This is
followed by 30.8% of the respondents who visit the library to prepare for
105
competitive examinations, 31.2% of the respondents like to get current and
general information, 29.6% of the respondents visit the library for Reading
journals and magazines, 20% of the respondents visit the library for leisure
reading, 22.8% for Preparation of class notes/ assignments/ seminar papers,
1.6% of the respondents visit the library to read employment news
respectively. Besides cited above, there are some other purposes also.
Hence most of the respondents visit the library for the academic improvement.
It also suggests that the library authority should consider the needs of the
users who prepare for the competitive examinations.

106
Table 4.16
Type of materials sought
No.of
S.No. Type of materials Percentage
Respondents
1. Reference Books 236 47.2
2. Newspapers 208 41.6
3. Employment newspaper 75 15
4. Journals/ Magazines 133 26.6
5. Text Books 179 35.8
6. Theses and Dissertations 104 20.8
7. E-Resources 55 11
8. Others 2 0.4
Total N=500
Table 4.16 discusses that 47.2% of the respondents preferred to seek
the reference books whereas 41.6% of the respondents newspapers. Fifteen
per cent of the respondents preferred to seek the employment newspaper
whereas 26.6% of the respondents seek Journals/ Magazines. This is
followed by, 35.8% seek text books, 20.8% seek theses and dissertations and
11% of the respondents seek e-resources. Besides cited above all, there are
107
some other sources also (0.4%). Hence most of the library users preferred to
seek the information from the reference books and newspapers.
Table 4.17
Library containing the necessary books
S.No. Options No.of Respondents Percentage
1. Agree 346 69.2
2. Disagree 154 30.8
Total 500 100
Table 4.17 shows that 69.2% of the respondents agree with library got
all the necessary books needed by the users whereas 30.8% of the
respondents disagree with library got all the necessary books needed by
them. Therefore most of the library users agree with library got all the
necessary books necessary for the library users.

108
Table 4.18
Satisfaction of Library Collection
1. Yes 363 72.6
2. No 137 27.4
Total 500 100
Table 4.18 shows the Satisfaction of Library Collection. In this study,
72.6% of the respondents are satisfied with the library collection whereas
27.4% are not satisfied with the library collection. Hence nearly three fourth of
the library users are satisfied with the library collection. It also suggests that
the library authority should satisfy the users for cent per cent.
109
Figure 4.4
Satisfaction of Library Collection

110
Table 4.19
Difficulties in Use of Information Resources
No.of
S.No. Information Sources Percentage
Respondents
1. Lack of time 206 41.2
2. Lack of staff 77 15.4
3. Lack of resources 115 23
Confusion arrangement of
4. 102 20.4
resources
Total 500 100
Table 4.19 shows the Difficulties in Use of Information Resources by

the university library users. In this study, 41.2% of the respondents report that
lack of time is the main difficulty to use information resources, 15.4% report
that lack of staff in libraries, 23% of the respondents report that lack of
resources and 20.4% of the respondents report that confused arrangement of
resources in the libraries respectively. Hence most of the respondents report
that lack of time as the main difficulty to use information resources. Hence
the library authority should consider the library hours for the convenience of
the library users. It also suggests that the authority should open the library on
Saturdays and Sundays for the benefit the research scholars.
111
Figure 4.5
Difficulties in use of information resources
Difficulties in use of information resources

112
Table 4. 20
Level of satisfaction of seeking Information through books
No.of
S.No. Satisfaction Percentage
Respondents
1. Very satisfied 116 23.2
2. Satisfied 330 66
3. Less satisfied 40 8
4. Dissatisfied 14 2.8
Total 500 100
Table 4.20 shows that 23.2% of the respondents report that they are
very satisfied for seeking Information through books , 66% report that
satisfied, 8% report that less satisfied and 2.8% report that dissatisfied
respectively. Hence 89.2% of the respondents are satisfied in seeking
information through books.

113
Table 4.21
Level of satisfaction of seeking Information through
Journal/Magazine/Periodicals
S.No. Satisfaction No.of Respondents Percentage
1. Very satisfied 109 21.8
2. Satisfied 341 68.2
3. Less satisfied 34 6.8
4. Dissatisfied 16 3.2
Total 500 100
Table 4.21 shows that 21.8% of the respondents are very much
satisfied with the Level of satisfaction of seeking Information through
Journal/Magazine/Periodicals, 68.2% are satisfied, 6.8% are less satisfied
and 3.2% are dissatisfied respectively. Hence 90% of the respondents are
satisfied with the level of satisfaction in seeking information through
Journal/Magazine/Periodicals.
114
Figure 4.6
Level of satisfaction of seeking Information through
Journal/Magazine/Periodicals
115
Table 4. 22
Availability of latest Textbooks
No.of
S.No. Options Percentage
Respondents
1. Very Good 75 15
2. Good 231 46.2
3. Satisfactory 99 19.8
4. Not Satisfactory 41 8.2
5. No Comments 54 10.8
Total 500 100
Table 4.22 shows the Availability of latest Textbooks. In this study,
15% of the respondents report that it is very good, 46.2% of the respondents
report that Good, 19.8% of the respondents report that it is satisfactory and
8.2% of the respondents report that it is not satisfactory. In this study, 10.8%
of the respondents do not express any comments. Hence 81% of the users
are satisfied with the availability of latest textbooks.

116
Opinions on satisfaction level about availability of latest
textbooks among the Male and Female users
Standard
Category N Mean t-value
Deviation
Male 256 3.714844 1.37
-1.01258
Female 244 3.840164 1.40
t (df:498) = -1.01258, p >0.05
Ho: Null Hypothesis
There is no significant difference between mean opinions among the
male and female library users and their satisfaction level about availability of
latest textbooks.
In this study, t-test is applied to find a mean difference in satisfaction
level about the use of latest textbooks among the male and female library
users. The result shows that there is no significant difference in satisfaction
levels of male and female users. Hence the Null hypothesis is accepted.
117
Table 4. 23
Balanced collection in all subjects
No.of
S.No. Opinions Percentage
Respondents
1. Very Good 64 12.8
2. Good 219 43.8
Total 500 100
Table 4.23 shows that 12.8% of the respondents report that balanced
collection of books and magazines in all subjects is very good, 43.8% of the
respondents report it to be Good, 19.4% of the respondents report that it to
be satisfactory and 7.8% of the respondents report that it is not satisfactory
respectively. Eighty one respondents(16.2%) do not express any comments.
Hence 76% of the respondents are satisfied with the balanced collection in all
subjects.
118
Table 4. 24
Adequacy of reference collections
No.of
Respondents
2. Good 199 39.8
Total 500 100
Table 4. 24 shows data on the Adequacy of reference collections in
libraries. In this study, 18.8% of the respondents report that adequacy of
reference collections is Very good, 39.8% of the respondents report that

good, 25.8% of the respondents report that satisfactory and 5.2% of the
respondents report that not satisfactory respectively. In this study, 10.4% of
the respondents do not express any comments. Hence 84.4% of the

respondents are satisfied with adequacy of reference collections in the
university libraries.
119
Table 4. 25
Adequacy of subject books
No.of
Respondents
2. Good 170 34
4. Not Satisfactory 35 7
Total 500 100
Table 4.25 shows the Adequacy of subject books. In this study, 19.8%
of the respondents report that adequacy of subject books is very good, 34% of
the respondents report that good, 30.4% of the respondents report that
satisfactory and 7% of the respondents report that not satisfactory
respectively. 8.8% of the respondents do not express any comments. Hence
most of the respondents are satisfied with the adequacy of subject books. It
also suggests that the library authority must take steps for the users cent per
cent satisfaction in the adequacy of subject books.
120
Figure 4.7
Adequacy of subject books

121
Table 4. 26
Availability of Bay Guides
2. Good 166 33.2
3. Satisfactory 135 27
Total 500 100
Table 4.26 shows the Availability of Bay Guides. Among the overall
respondents, 15.4% of the respondents report that very good, 33.2% of the
respondents report that good, 27% of the respondents report that satisfactory
and 6.2% of the respondents report that not satisfactory.Ninety one
respondents (18.2%) do not express any comments. Hence most of the
respondents are satisfied with the Availability of Bay Guides in the university
libraries.
122
Table 4. 27
Furnishing of Reading Room
No.of
Respondents
1. Very Good 176 35.2
2. Good 180 36
Total 500 100
Table 4.27 shows that 35.2% of the respondents report that furnishing
of Reading Room is very good, 36% of the respondents report that good,
20% of the respondents report that satisfactory and 4% of the respondents
report that not satisfactory respectively. In this study, 4.8% of the respondents
do not express any comments. Hence most of the respondents are very much
satisfied with the Furnishing of Reading Room at the university library.

123
Table 4. 28
Cleanliness and working space of the Library
No.of
Respondents
1. Very Good 158 31.6
2. Good 214 42.8
Total 500 100
Table 4.28 shows that. 31.6% of the respondents report that
Cleanliness and working space of the Library is very good, 42.8% of the
respondents report that good, 14.8% of the respondents report that

respectively. In this study, 5.8% of the respondents do not express any
comments. Hence most of the respondents are fully satisfied with the
cleanliness and working space of the Library. In this study, five per cent of the
library users are not satisfied with cleanliness and working space of the library
and another 5.8% do not express any comments. Hence the university library
should engage some menial worker to clean the library. Cleanliness and
working space of the Library has to satisfy the users. This atmosphere
encourages the users for sitting more hours for utilizing the library.
124
Table 4. 29
Usage of latest equipments
No.of
Respondents
2. Good 220 44
Total 500 100
Table 4.29 shows that 14.4% of the respondents report that Use of
Latest equipments is very good, 44% of the respondents report that Good,
23.6% of the respondents report that satisfactory and 7.6% of the
the respondents do not express any comments. Hence most of the
respondents are satisfied with the Use of Latest equipments.

125
Table 4.30
Usage of Latest equipments among the University Library users
Options Not
Very No
S.No University Good Satisfactory Satisfactor Total
Good comments.
Library y
Alagappa 25 49 14 5 7 100
1.
University (25%) (49%) (14%) (5%) (7%)
Bharathiyar 10 44 16 16 14
2. 100
University (10%) (44%) (16%) (16%) (14%)
University 23 34 27 6 10
3 100
of Madras (23%) (34%) (27%) (6%) (10%)
M.K. 10 41 33 8 8
4 100
University (10%) (41%) (33%) (8%) (8%)
MS 4 52 28 3 13
5 100
University (4%) (52%) (28%) (3%) (13%)
Total 72 220 118 38 52 500

126
Table 4.30 shows that 88% of the Alagappa University library users are
satisfied with the use of latest equipment, 70% of the Bharathiyar university
Library users are satisfied with the use of latest equipment, 84% of the
Madras University library users are satisfied with the use of latest equipment,
84% of the Madurai Kamaraj University Library users are satisfied with the
use the of latest equipment and 84% of the Manonmaniam Sundaranar
University library users are satisfied with the use of latest equipments. Among
the five university library users, majority of the Alagappa University library
users are satisfied with the use of latest equipments.

127
Figure 4.8
Usage of Latest equipments among the University Library users
Usage of Latest eqpuipments among the University

LIbrary Users
128
Table 4. 31
Ventilation and lighting in the Reading and Stack Rooms
No.of
Respondents
1. Very Good 111 22.2
2. Good 215 43
Total 500 100
Table 4.31 shows that 22.2% of the respondents report that Ventilation
and lighting in the Reading and Stack Rooms is very good, 43% of the
respondents report that Good, 24.2% of the respondents report that
satisfactory and 3.2% of the respondents report that not satisfactory
comments. Hence most of the users are satisfied with the ventilation and
lighting in the Reading and Stack Rooms.

129
Table 4.32
Ambience/Atmosphere of the library
No.of
Respondents
1. Very Good 130 26
2. Good 228 45.6
Total 500 100
Table 4.32 shows data on that 26% of the respondents report that the
atmosphere of the library is very good, 45.6% of the respondents report that
respondents report that not satisfactory respectively. In this study, 3.2% of the
users do not express any comments. Hence 94% of the users are satisfied
with the atmosphere of the library.

130
Table 4.33
Approach of library staff
1. Very Good 171 34.2
2. Good 195 39
Total 500 100
Table 4.33 shows data on the Approach of library staff. 34.2% of the
respondents report that approach of library staff is very good, 39% of the
respectively. Twenty one respondents (4.2%) do not express any comments.
Hence most of the respondents are satisfied with the Approach of library staff
in university library.
131
Figure 4.9
Approach of library staff towards users
Approach of Library Staff towards users

132
Table 4. 34
User Friendliness of OPAC
2. Good 186 37.2
Total 500 100
Table 4.34 shows that 16.2% of the respondents report that User
Friendliness of OPAC is very good, 37.2% of the respondents report that
the respondents do not express any comments. Hence 79% of the users are
satisfied with the User Friendliness of OPAC.

133
Table 4. 35
Self- expressiveness of classified arrangement
1. Very Good 85 17
2. Good 210 42
Total 500 100
Table 4.35 shows that 17% of the respondents report Self-
expressiveness of classified arrangement is very good, 42% of the
satisfactory and 6.2% of the respondents report that not satisfactory
respectively. 14.6% of the respondents do not express any comments. Hence
most of the respondents are satisfied with the Self- expressiveness of
classified arrangement.
134
Table 4. 36
Availability/Accessibility of E-resources
2. Good 226 45.2
Total 500 100
Table 4.36 shows data on the Availability / Accessibility of E-resources.
In this study, among the overall respondents, 16.4% of the respondents report
that availability of e-resources are very good, 45.2% of the respondents report
that good, 19% of the respondents report that satisfactory and 5.2% of the
respondents report that not satisfactory respectively. 14.2% of the
respondents do not express any comments. Hence it is concluded that most

of the respondents are satisfied with the availability/accessibility of E-
resources.
.
135
Table 4.37
Internet connectivity
1. Very Good 109 21.8
2. Good 202 40.4
Total 500 100
Table 4.37 shows the status of the Internet connectivity of the

university libraries. In this study, among the overall respondents, 21.8% of the
respondents report that Internet connectivity of the university library is very
good, 40.4% of the respondents report that good, 17.8% of the respondents
report that satisfactory and 8.6% of the respondents report that not
satisfactory respectively. 11.4% of the respondents do not express any
comments. Hence it is suggested that most of the respondents are satisfied
with the Internet connectivity in the university libraries.
136
Table 4.38
Accessibility to reading materials
1. Easy to access 265 53
2. Fairly easy to access 159 31.8
3. Not easy to access 76 15.2
Total 500 100
Table 4.38 shows the accessibility to reading materials. In this study,
53% of the respondents report that accessibility to reading materials is easy,
31.8% report that fairly easy to access and 15.2% of the respondents report
that not easy to access. Hence most of the respondents report that
accessibility to reading materials is easy.

137
Table 4 .39
Level of satisfaction of the Library resources
No.of
S.No. Use level Percentage
Respondents
1. 25% 57 11.4
2. 50% 240 48
3. 75% 162 32.4
4. 100% 41 8.2
Total 500 100
Table 4.39 shows the level of satisfaction of library resources. In this
study, 11.4% of the respondents report that level of satisfaction of library
resources is 25%, 48% of the respondents report that 50%, 32.4% of the
respondents report that 75% and 8.2% of the respondents report that
100%.Hence most of the respondents’ level of satisfaction from the use of
library resources is 50%.

138
Figure 4.10
Level of satisfaction of the Library resources

139
Table 4.40
Chi-square analysis of Residing sector and Level of Satisfaction of
library’s resources by the users
Use level
S.No. Residing 25% 50% 75% 100% Total
sector
34 177 117 24 352
1. Rural
(9.66%) (50.28%) (33.24%) (6.82%)
23 63 45 17 148
2. Urban
(15.54%) (42.57%) (30.41%) (11.49%)
Total 57 240 162 41 500
Table 4.40 shows the level of satisfaction of library resources. Among
the overall rural users 9.66% of the respondents report that their level of
satisfaction of library resources is 25%, 50.28% of the respondents report that
their level is 50%, 33.24% of the respondents report that their level is 75%
and 6.82% of the respondents report that their level is 100%. Hence half of
the rural respondents’ level of satisfaction from the use of library resources is
50%. Among the overall urban users 15.54% of the respondents report that
their level of satisfaction of library resources is 25%, 42.57% of the
respondents report that their level is 50%, 30.41% of the respondents report
that their level is 75% and 11.49% of the respondents report that their level is
100%. Hence more than two fifth of urban respondents’ level of satisfaction
from the use of library resources is 50%.

140
Ho: Null Hypothesis
There is no association between the Residing sector of the users and their
opinion of level of satisfaction of the library resources.
There is an association between the Residing sector and Level of satisfaction
of library’s resources by the library users.

Degrees of Freedom
7.48 3 7.815
significance is 7.815.The calculated value of is lower than this table
value and hence the Null hypothesis is accepted and hence alternative
hypothesis is rejected. It is concluded that there is no association between the
gender and the category of Internet skills of the respondents.

141
Table 4. 41
Rating of Reading environment
No.of
S.No. Rating Percentage
Respondents
1. Excellent 193 38.6
2. Good 216 43.2
3. Fair 60 12
4. Average 25 5
5. Poor 6 1.2
Total 500 100
Table 4.41 shows that 38.6% of the library users report that rating of
reading environment is excellent, 43.2% report that good,12% report that
fair,5% report that average and 1.2% report that poor respectively. Hence
most of the respondents report that their rating is good with the reading
environment.
142
Table 4. 42
Rating of Reference book section
No.of
Respondents
2. Good 199 39.8
3. Fair 61 12.2
4. Average 47 9.4
5. Poor 15 3
Total 500 100
the reference book section is excellent, 39.8% report that good, 12.2% report
that fair, 9.4% report that average and 3% report that poor respectively.
Hence most of the respondents’ rating is good with the reference book
section.
143
Table 4. 43
Rating of Periodical section
No.of
Respondents
2. Good 159 31.8
3. Fair 97 19.4
4. Average 73 14.6
5. Poor 19 3.8
Total 500 100
periodical section is excellent, 31.8% report that good, 19.4% report that fair,
14.6% report that average and 3.8% report that poor respectively. Hence
most of the respondents’ rating is good with the periodical section.

144
Table 4. 44
Rating of Circulation section
No. of
Respondents
2. Good 175 35
3. Fair 80 16
4. Average 78 15.6
5. Poor 13 2.6
Total 500 100
Circulation section is excellent, 35% report that good, 16% report that fair,
most of the respondents’ rating is good with the Circulation section

145
Figure 4. 11
Rating of Circulation section

146
Table 4. 45
Rating of Text book section
No. of
Respondents
2. Good 193 38.6
3. Fair 57 11.4
4. Average 61 12.2
5. Poor 12 2.4
Total 500 100
Text book section is excellent, 38.6% report that good, 11.4% report that fair,
most of the respondents’ rating is good with Text book section.

147
Table 4. 46
Rating of Internet & Infonet journals section
No.of
Respondents
2. Good 170 34
3. Fair 55 11
4. Average 46 9.2
5. Poor 33 6.6
Total 500 100
Table 4.46 shows that 39.2% of the library users report that rating
Internet & Infonet journals section is excellent, 34% report that good, 11%
report that fair, 9.2% report that average and 6.6% report that poor
respectively. Hence most of the respondents’ rating is good with the Internet &
Infonet journals section

148
Table 4.47
Opinion about the overall services of library
No.of
S.No. Opinion Percentage
Respondents
1. Very Good 130 26
2. Good 257 51.4
Total 500 100
Table 4.47 expresses that 26% of the library users report that overall
service is very good, 51.4% report that good and 18% report that satisfactory
respectively. Twenty three respondents(4.6%) are not satisfied with overall
services of the library. Therefore 95.4% of the library users are satisfied with
the overall services of the university libraries in Tamilnadu.

149
Figure 4.12
Opinion about the overall services of library

150
Table 4. 48
Chi-square analysis of status of the users and their opinion
about the overall services of the university libraries
Opinion about the Overall services

S.No Status of the
. users Total
Very Not
Good Satisfactory
Good satisfactory
Faculty 5 17 6
1. - 28
members (17.86) (60.71) (21.43)
M.Phil R. 14 60 14 5
2. 93
Scholars (15.05) (64.52) (15.05) (5.38)
Ph.D 25 20 25
3. - 70
R.Scholar (35.71) (28.57) (35.71)
86 160 45 18
4. P.G.Students 309
(27.83) (51.78) (14.56) (5.82)
Total 130 257 90 23 500
(Figure in the parenthesis represents the percentage)
Table 4.48 expresses that Status of the users and their opinion about
the overall services of the university libraries. Among the overall faculty
members, 17.86% report that overall service is very good,60.71% report
that good and 21.43% report that satisfactory. Among the overall M.Phil
research scholars, 15.05% report that overall service is very good, 64.52%
report that good, 35.71% report that satisfactory and 5.38% report that not
151
satisfactory. Among the overall Ph.D research scholars, 35.71% report that
overall service is very good, 28.57% report that good and 35.71% report that
satisfactory. Among the overall Post graduate students, 27.83% report that
overall service is very good,51.78% report that good and 14.56% report that
satisfactory and 5,82% do not express any comments. In this study all the
faculty members and Ph.D research scholars are satisfied with the overall
services of the university library and around 5% of the M.Phil research
scholar and Post graduate students are not satisfied with the overall services
of the university libraries. It is suggested that the library authority should
satisfy all kinds of users.
Ho: Null Hypothesis
There is no association between the status of the users and their opinion
about the overall services of the university libraries.
There is an association between the status of the users and their opinion
about the overall services of the university libraries.

Degrees of Freedom
73.04 9 16.919
152
significance is 16.919. The calculated value of is higher than this table
hypothesis is accepted. It is concluded that the there is an association
between the status of the users and their opinion about the overall services
of the university libraries.

Table 4. 49
Satisfaction with the Library Services
Not Not
S.No Services Satisfactory
Satisfactory Responded
Reference Services
1. 438(87.6%) 39(7.8%) 23(4.6%)
(N=500)
Circulation services
2. 390(78%) 71(14.2%) 39(7.8%)
(N=500)
Current awareness
3. servies 405(81%) 75(15%) 20(4%)
(N=500)
Reading Guidance/
4. Assistance 406(81.2%) 65(13%) 29(5.8%)
(N=500)
ILL (Inter Library Loan)
5. 353(70.6%) 89(17.8%) 58(11.6%)
(N=500)
Reprographic services
6. 340(68%) 99(19.8%) 61(12.2%)
(N=500)
Microfilm/Microfiches
7. 302(60.4%) 133(26.6%) 65(13%)
(N=500)
Online Catalogue
8. (N=500) 411(82.2%) 61(12.2%) 28(5.6%)
Online Database
Literature search
9. 399(79.8%) 60(12%) 41(8.2%)
(N=500)
Bibliographic cleaning
10. services 372 (74.4%) 105(21%) 23 (4.6%)
(N=500)
Reference
11. Workshop/Orientation 367 (73.4%) 94 (18.8%) 39 (7.8%)
(N=500)
Online Journals/Infonet
12. Journals 380 (76%) 93 (18.6%) 27(5.4%)
(N=500)

153
Table 4.49 shows the respondent’s satisfaction with the various library
services. In this study, 87.6% of the library users are satisfied with the
reference service (First rank) rendered by the library and 7.8% are not
satisfied. Twenty three library users (4.6%) do not express any comments.
This is followed by, 82.2% of the library users are satisfied with the online
catalogue service (Second rank), 81.2% of the users are satisfied with the
reading guidance /assistance service (Third rank) and 81% are satisfied with
the Current Awareness Service (Fourth rank), 79.8% are satisfied with the
online Database Literature service (Fifth rank) 78% are satisfied with the
circulation service (sixth rank), 76% are satisfied with the online
journals/Infonet services(Seventh rank), 74.4% are satisfied with the
Bibliographic cleaning services(Eighth rank), 73.4% are satisfied with the
reference workshop/Orientation(Ninth rank) and 70.6% are satisfied with the
Intern Library Loan (Tenth rank), 68% are satisfied with the reprographic
service(Eleventh rank) and 60.4% are satisfied with the Micro
film/Microfiche(twelfth rank). In this study, Reprographic service got the
eleventh rank and twenty per cent of the users are not satisfied with the
reprographic service provided by the library. Hence it is suggested that the
Librarian should provide the quality reprographic service for the benefit of the
users.
154
Table 4.50
Response to Shelf-arrangement
No. of
Respondents
1. Yes 213 42.6
2. No 238 47.6
Total 500 100
Table 4.50 shows that 42.6% of the library users report that poor shelf
arrangement is a main hindrance for using library resources whereas 47.6%
do not accept this statement. In this study, 9.8% of the library users do not
express any comments. Hence most of the library users do not accept that
poor shelf arrangement is a hindrance to the library usage.

155
Table 4. 51
Does height of racks hinders browsing of books?
1. Yes 158 31.6
2. No 272 54.4
4. No Comments 70 14
Total 500 100
Table 4.51 shows that 31.6% of the library users report that Height of
racks hinders browsing of books whereas 54.4% do not accept this statement.
In this study, 14% of the library users do not express any comments. Hence
most of the library users do not accept that height of racks hinders browsing
of books.
156
Table 4. 52
Subjects books are scattered in the library
1. Yes 169 33.8
2. No 270 54
Total 500 100
Table 4.52 shows that 33.8% of the library users report that Subjects
books are scattered in the library whereas 54% do not accept this statement.
In this study, 12.2% of the library users do not express any comments. Hence
most of the library users do not accept that subjects books are scattered in
the library.
157
Table 4. 53
Lack of library assistance for location of the reading materials
1. Yes 288 57.6
2. No 135 27
Total 500 100
Table 4.53 shows that 57.6% of the library users report that lack of
assistance from the library staff is hinders the location of the reading
materials whereas 27% do not accept this statement. In this study, 15.4% of
the library users do not express any comments. Hence most of the library
users accept that lack of assistance from the library staff hinders the location
of the reading materials.

158
Table 4. 54
Is the classification scheme followed by the library staff is not
understandable?
S.No. Opinions No. of Respondents Percentage
1. Yes 259 51.8
2. No 117 23.4
Total 500 100
Table 4.54 shows that 51.8% of the library users report that
classification scheme followed by the library staff is not understandable
whereas 23.4% do not accept this statement. In this study, 24.8% of the
library users do not express any comments. Hence most of the library users
accept that classification scheme followed by the library staff is not
understandable.
159
Table 4.55
Survey of users’s satisfaction by the Librarian
No.of
Respondents
1. Agree 236 47.2
2. Strongly Agree 119 23.8
3. Disagree 32 6.4
4. Strongly Disagree 33 6.6
Total 500 100
Table 4.55 shows that 47.2% of the respondents agree with librarian
conducts user satisfaction survey, 23.8% of the respondents strongly agree,
6.4% disagree, 6.6% strongly disagree respectively. In this study, 16% do not
express any comments. Hence most of the respondents agree with librarian’s
mode of conducting a user satisfaction survey.

160
Table 4.56
Feedback system of Librarian to keep track of complaints (Formal)
No.of
Respondents
1. Agree 197 39.4
2. Strongly Agree 120 24
3. Disagree 39 7.8
Total 500 100
Table 4.56 shows that 39.4% of the respondents agree for Librarian
establishing feedback system to keep track of complaint statistics, 24% of the
respondents strongly agree, 7.8% disagree, and 3.6% strongly disagree
respectively. In this study, 25.2% do not express any comments. Hence
63.4% of the respondents agree with the Librarian’s mode of establishing
feedback system to keep track of complaint statistics.

161
Figure 4.13
Users opinion about Librarian feedback system to keep track of
complaint (Formal)
Users opinion about Librarian feedback system

to keep track of complaint (Formal)
162
Table 4. 57
Opinion of the five university library users about feedback system of
Librarian to keep track of complaints (Formal)
Time
S.No University Agree S.Agree Disagree S.Disagree NC. Tot
Library
48 28 12 1 12
1. ALU 100
(48) (28) (12) (1) (12)
34 26 4 6
2. BU 30 100
(34) (26) (4) (6)
28 20 11 41
3 UM - 100
(28) (20) (11) (41)
36 25 4 8 26
4 MKU 100
(36) (25) (4) (8) (26)
51 21 8 3 17
5 MSU 100
(51) (21) (8) (3) (17)
Total 197 120 39 18 126 500
S.Agree – Strongly agree, S.Disagree- Strongly Disagree,
NC-No comments
Table 4. 57 shows that 76% of the Alagappa university library users
agree with librarian establishing feedback system to keep track of complaint
statistics whereas 13% of the users do not agree. This is followed by, 60% of
the Bharathiyar University library users who agree with librarian establishes
feedback system to keep track of complaint statistics whereas 10% of the
users do not agree. Forty eight per cent of the Madras university library users
163
agree with Librarian establishes feedback system to keep track of complaint
statistics whereas 11% of the users do not agree. Sixty one per cent of the
Madurai Kamaraj university library users agree with librarian establishes
Feedback system to keep track of complaint statistics whereas 8% of the
users do not agree. Seventy two per cent of the Manonmaniam Sundaranar
university library users agree with librarian establishes feedback system to
keep track of complaint statistics whereas 8% of the users do not agree.
Hence nearly three fourth of the Maonmaniam Sundaranar University library
users agree with librarian establishes feedback system to keep track of
complaint statistics.
164
Table 4. 58
Indirect lines of communication with the users through informal
contacts
No.of
Respondents
1. Agree 184 36.8
3. Disagree 56 11.2
Total 500 100
Table 4.58 shows that 36.8% of the respondents agree with Librarian
establishing Indirect lines of communication with the users through informal
contacts , 21.4% of the respondents strongly agree, 11.2% disagree, and
4.2% strongly disagree respectively. In this study, 26.4% do not express any
comments. Hence 58.2% of the respondents agree with librarian establishes
Indirect lines of communication with the users through informal contacts.
165
Table 4. 59
Users response to the timeliness of work provided by the Library staff
No.of
Respondents
1. Agree 222 44.4
3. Disagree 32 6.2
Total 500 100
Table 4.59 discusses that 44.4% of the library users agree with they
are satisfied with the timeliness of work provided by the Library staff. In this
study, 20.2% of the respondents strongly agree, 6.2% disagree and 5.2%
strongly disagree. This is followed by, 23.8% of the respondents do not
express any comments. Therefore 64.8% of the library users are satisfied with
the timeliness of the work provided by the library staff. It suggests that the
library authority should satisfy all the users with the timeliness of the work
provided by the library staff.
166
Table 4. 60
Minimum error rate in the work provided by the Library staff
No.of
Respondents
1. Agree 196 39.2
3. Disagree 58 11.6
Total 500 100
Table 4. 60 expresses that 39.2% of the library users agree with the
find a minimum error rate in the work provided by the Library staff, 17.2%
strongly agree, 11.6% disagree, 3.8% strongly disagree respectively. In this
study, 28.2% of the respondents do not express any comments. Therefore the
majority of the library users agree with the finding that a minimum error rate
in work provided by the Library staff.

167
Table 4. 61
Work provided by the Library staff is consistent with user requirements
S.No. Opinions No.of Respondents Percentage
1. Agree 201 40.2
3. Disagree 22 4.4
Total 500 100
Table 4.61 shows that 40.2% of the library users agree to work
provided by the Library staff is consistent with user requirements, 19.2% of
the library users strongly agree, 4.4% disagree, 3.8% strongly disagree
comments. Therefore majority of the users agree that work provided by the
Library staff is consistent with user requirements.

168
Table 4 .62
Satisfaction with the Quantity of work provided by the library staff
1. Agree 224 44.8
3. Disagree 51 10.2
Total 500 100
Table 4.62 shows that 44.8% of the library users are satisfied with the
quantity of work provided by the library staff, 19.2% of the users strongly
agree, 10.2% disagree, 3.6% strongly disagree respectively. Therefore 64%
of the library users are satisfied with the quantity of work provided by the
library staff. It is therefore suggested that library authority should try to obtain
the library user’s cent percent satisfaction on quantity of work provided by the
library staff.
169
Table 4. 63
Satisfaction with the Quality of work provided by the Library staff
No.of
Respondents
1. Agree 228 45.6
3. Disagree 41 8.2
Total 500 100
Table 4.63 shows that 45.6% of the library users are satisfied with
quality of work provided by the library staff, 22.8% of the users strongly agree
and 8.2% disagree respectively. Therefore 68.4% of the library users are
satisfied with quality of work provided by the library staff. It is also suggested
that library professionals should get the library users cent percent of
satisfaction on quality of work provided by the library staff.

170
Figure 4. 14
Satisfaction with the Quality of work provided by the Library staff

171
Table 4. 64
Chi square analysis of age of the users and their satisfaction with
Quality of work provided by the Library Professionals
No
S.No. Age Agree S.Agree Disagree Comment Total
s
20-25 147 77 25 93
1. 342
yrs (42.98) (22.51) (7.31) (27.19)
26-30 40 24 11 6
2. 81
Yrs (49.38) (29.63) (13.58) (7.41)
31-35 23 5 5 6
3. 39
Yrs (58.97) (12.82) (12.82) (15.38)
36-40 16 3 12
4. - 31
Yrs (51.61) (9.68) (38.71)
41
2 5
5. and - - 7
(28.57) (71.43)
above
Total 228 114 41 117 500
Table 4.64 shows the age of the users and their satisfaction with
Quality of work provided by the Library professionals. Among the 20-25 years
age category of users, 42.98% agree that they are satisfied with quality of
work provided by the library staff, 22.51% of the users strongly agree and
7.31% disagree respectively. Among the 26-30 years age category of users,
49.38% agree that they are satisfied with quality of work provided by the
library staff, 29.63% of the users strongly agree and 13.58% disagree
respectively. Among the 31-35 years age category of users, 58.97% agree
172
that they are satisfied with quality of work provided by the library staff, 12.82%
of the users strongly agree and 12.82% of the users disagree respectively.
Among the 36-40 years age category of users, 51.61% agree that they are
satisfied with quality of work provided by the library staff and 9.68% of the
users strongly agree. In this category nobody report disagree. Among the 41
and above years age category of users, 28.57% of the users agree that they
are satisfied with quality of work provided by the library staff and 71.43% of
the users strongly agree. In this category nobody report disagree. It suggests
that the university library professionals should enable all the age category of
users to satisfy with Quality of work provided by the Library professionals
Ho: Null Hypothesis
There is no association between the age of the users and their satisfaction
with Quality of work provided by the Library professionals.
There is an association between the age of the users and their satisfaction
with Quality of work provided by the Library professionals.

Degrees of Freedom
35.37 12 21.026
173
significance is 21.026.The calculated value of is higher than this table
hypothesis is accepted. It is concluded that there is an association between
the age of the users and their satisfaction with Quality of work provided by the
Library professionals.
Table 4. 65
Users rarely complain about the library staff
No.of
Respondents
1. Agree 176 35.2
3. Disagree 46 9.2
Total 500 100
Table 4.65 shows that 35.2% of the users agree with that they rarely
complain about the library staff, 15.4% strongly agree, 9.2% disagree and
3.4% strongly disagree respectively. In this study, 36.8% do not express any
comments. Hence half of the users rarely complain about the library staff.
174
Table 4. 66
Talk with library staff on Library related Information
No.of
Respondents
1. Agree 181 36.2
3. Disagree 39 7.8
Total 500 100
Table 4.66 shows that 36.2% of the users agree with they talk with
library staff regular basis regarding the library related information, 21.2% of
the users strongly agree, 7.8% users disagree and 5.8% strongly disagree
respectively. Hence 57.4% of the users talk with library staff on regular basis
regarding the library related information

175
Table 4. 67
Social relationship with the library staff
No.of
Respondents
1. Agree 227 45.4
3. Disagree 30 6
Total 500 100
Table 4. 67 discusses that 45.4% of the respondents agree that they
keep good relationship with the library staff, 21.2% strongly agree, 6%
disagree, 4.2% strongly disagree. In this study, 23.2% of the respondents do
not express any comments. Therefore 66.6% of the library users keep good
relationship with the library staff. This is useful to maintain the good
atmosphere in the library.

176
Opinion about maintaining a good relationship among the rural
and urban users with the Library staff
Standard
Category N Mean t-value
Deviation
Rural 315 3.57 1.89

4.11
Urban 185 3.03 1.74
t (df:498)=4.11, p < 0.05
Ho: Null Hypothesis
There is no significant difference between Residing sector of the users
and their mean opinion about maintaining a good relationship with the library
staff.
In this study, t- test is applied to find a mean difference opinion about
maintaining a good relationship with the library staff among the rural and
urban users. The result shows that there is a significant difference in opinion
of male and female users.Hence the null hypothesis rejected.

177
SECTION II
LIBRARY PROFESSIONALS DATA ANANLYSIS
This Section intended to explain the demographic characteristics of
library professionals. Following tables depict about the library professionals’
satisfaction, library professionals’ opinions on users satisfaction and effective
operation of the library.
Table 4.68
Demographic characteristics of Library Professionals- Gender and Age
No.of
Respondents
Gender Male 37 69.81
Female 16 30.19
Total 53 100
Age 20- 25 years 4 7.55
26- 30 10 18.87
31-35 13 24.53
36-40 11 20.75
41 and above 15 28.30
Total 53 100
Table 4.68 shows the Demographic characteristics of Library
Professionals- Gender and Age . In this study, 69.81% of the respondents
belong to the category of male whereas 30.19% of the respondents belong to
the category of female. Hence most of the Library professionals belong to the
category of male. In this study, 7.55% of the respondents belong to the age
178
category of 20- 25 years, 18.87% of the respondents belong to the age
category of 26-30, 24.53% of the respondents belong to 31-35, 20.75%
belong to age category of 36-40 and 28.30% of the respondents belong to the
age category of 41 and above. Hence most of the Library professionls belong
to the age category of 41 and above.

179
Figure 4.15
Demographic characteristics of Library Professionals- Gender and Age

180
Table 4. 69
Demographic characteristics of Library Professionals -Marital Status
and Residing sector
No.of
Respondents
Marital status Married 49 92.45
Unmarried 4 7.55
Total 53 100
Residing
Rural 11 20.75
sector
Urban 42 79.25
Total 53 100
Table 4.69 elicits that 92.45% of the Library professionals belong to the
category of married whereas 7.55% of the respondents belong to unmarried.
Hence most of the respondents belong to the category of married.
In this study, 20.75% of the professionals belong to the area of rural

category and 79.25% belong to the area of urban category. Hence most of the
respondents belong to the urban category and work in the university libraries
in Tamilnadu.
181
Table 4. 70
Demographic characteristics of Library Professionals -Qualification
No.of
S.No. Qualification Percentage
Respondents
1. B.L.I.Sc 6 11.32
2. M.L.I.Sc 10 18.87
3. M.L.I.Sc & M.Phil 8 15.09
4. P.G with M.L.I.Sc & M.Phil 14 26.42
5. Ph.d 9 16.98
6. Others 6 11.32
Total 53 100
Table 4.70 expresses the Distribution of Respondents by Qualification-
Wise. In this study, among the overall 53 respondents, 11.32% of the
respondents belong to the B.L.I.Sc qualification, 18.87% belong to the
M.L.I.Sc qualification, 15.09% belong to M.L.I.Sc & M.Phil qualification,
26.42% belong to P.G with M.L.I.Sc & M.Phil qualification and 16.98% belong
to Ph.D qualification. Hence most of the Library Professionals belong to P.G
with M.L.I.Sc & M.Phil qualification.

182
Table 4. 71
Members of Professional body
No.of
S.No. Membership Percentage
Respondents
1. Yes 46 86.79
2. No 7 13.21
Total 53 100
Table 4.71 shows that 86.79% of the respondents are the member of
the professional bodies whereas 13.21% are do not have membership in any
professional body.
Table 4.72
Type of Professional bodies
No.of
S.No. Type of body Percentage
Respondents
1. International 14 30.43
2. National 24 52.17
3. Regional 2 4.35
4. Local 6 13.04
5. Other - -
Total 46 100
Table 4.72 shows the library professionals’ type of membership of the
professional body association related information. In this study, 30.43% of the
library professionals are the member of the international professionals

183
association member, 52.17% are national professionals association member,
4.35% are regional and 13.04% are the member of the Local professional
associations.
Table 4.73
Aware of Total Quality Management
No.of
Respondents
1. Yes 53 100
2. No - -
Total 53 100
Table 4.73 describes the aware of Total Quality Managemetn. It is
clear that all the 53 library professions (100%) are aware of the Total Quality
Management.
Table 4. 74
Programmes on Total Quality Management
No.of
Respondents
1. Yes 29 54.72
2. No 24 45.28
Total 53 100

184
Table 4.74 elicits that 54.72% of the respondents attended the
programme on Total Quality Management whereas 45.28% of the
respondents have not attended any programme on Total Quality
Management. Hence more than half of the respondents have attended the
programme on Total Quality Management. It is suggested that the university
authority encourage the library professionals to attend the programme
regarding the Total Quality Management.
Table 4. 75
Opinion about the timings of library
No.of
S.No. Opinion Percentage
Respondents
1. Convenient 47 88.68
2. Inconvenient - -
Total 53 100
Table 4.75 shows that 88.68% of the library professionals report that
the timing of the Library is convenient and nobody report that inconvenient.
11.32% of the respondents do not express any comments regarding the
timing of the library. Therefore is is clear that most of the library professionals
are satisfied with the timing of the library.

185
Table 4. 76
Feelings about the collection in library
No.of
Respondents
1. Very Good 41 77.36
2. Good 6 11.32
4. Not Satisfactory - -
Total 53 100
Table 4.76 shows that 77.36% of the library professionals feel very
good with the library collection, 11.32% feel good, 7.55% feel satisfied and
3.77% of the respondents do not express any comments with library
collection. Therefore 96% of the library professionals are satisfied with the
collection of the library.

186
Table 4. 77
Type of collections to improve the Library
No.of
S.No. Type of collection Percentage
Respondents
1. Reference 28 52.83
2. General 17 32.08
3. Subject 2 3.77
4. Others 6 11.32
Total 53 100
Table 4.77 describes that 52.83% of the respondents report that
reference collection should be improved in the library, 32.08% report that
general collection should be improved, 3.77% of the respondents report that
subject collection should be improved in the library. Besides cited above,
there are some other collections also (11.32%). More than half of the library
professionals report that reference collection should be improved. Hence the
university authority should discuss with the library professionals for improving
the reference collections by allocating funds.

187
Table 4. 78
Service rendered by the Library
No.of
S.No. Services Percentage
Respondents
1. Circulation 11 20.76
3. Online 30 56.60
4. Reprographic Service 4 7.55
5. Other Service 2 3.77
Total 53 100
Table 4.78 shows that 20.76% of the library professionals report that
circulation service is rendered effectively by the library, 11.32% report that
reference service, 56.60% report that online service and 7.55% report that
reprographic service is rendered effectively by the library. Besides cited
above, there are some other services also (3.77%).Hence most of the library
professionals report that the online service is rendered effectively by the
library. It suggests that the library authority should take care to improve all
the services rendered by the library.
188
Figure 4. 16
Service effectively rendered by the Library Staff
Service effectively rendered by the Library Staff

189
Table 4. 79
Services to improve the Library
S.No. Services No.of Respondents Percentage
1. Circulation 12 22.64
3. Online 13 24.53
4. Reprographic Service 11 20.75
5. Other Service 2 3.77
Total 53 100
Table 4.79 shows that 22.64% of the respondents report that
circulation service should be improved in the university libraries. In this study,
28.30% of the respondents report that reference service should be improved,
24.53% report that online service, 20.75% report that reprographic service.
Besides the cited above services, there are some other also
(3.77%).Therefore the majority of the library professionals report that
reference service should be improved in the university libraries.

190
Table 4. 80
Library professionals’ opinions about the users’ attitude regarding the
facilities and services of library
S.No. Opinions No. of Respondents Percentage
1. Very Good 27 50.95
2. Good 18 33.96
Total 53 100
Table 4.80 expresses that 50.95% of the respondents report that

50.95% of the users’ attitude regarding the facilities and services of the library
is very good, 33.96% report that good,7.55% report that satisfactory and
3.77% report that not satisfactory respectively. In this study, 3.77% of the
respondents do not express any comments. Hence the majority of the library
professionals report that users’ attitude regarding the facilities and services of
the library is good.
191
Table 4. 81
Satisfaction of users towards the authorities
No.of
Respondents
1. Agree 25 47.18
3. Disagree - -
Total 53 100
Table 4.81 discusses that 47.18% of the library professionals agree
that they are satisfied by the authority. This is followed by, 45.28% of the
respondents report that strongly agree whereas 3.77% of the library
professionals report that strongly disagree. In this study, 3.77% of the library
professionals do not express any comments. Hence most of the library
professionals are satisfied with the authority.

192
Table 4. 82
Role of management in encouraging and recognizing the team work
No.of
Respondents
1. Agree 22 41.51
3. Disagree - -
Total 53 100
Table 4.82 shows that 41.51% of the respondents agree with
management’s encouragement and recognize the team work effort, 50.95%
strongly agree and 3.77% strongly disagree respectively. Two respondents
(3.77%) do not express any comments. Therefore most of the library
professionals agree with management’s encouragement and recognizes the
team work effort.

193
Table 4. 83
Management’s recognition of suggestions
No.of
Respondents
1. Agree 19 35.85
3. Disagree 4 7.55
5. No Comments - --
Total 53 100
Table 4. 83 discusses that 35.85% of the Library professionals agree
with management’s recognition of their suggestions, 52.83% strongly agree,
7.55% disagree and 3.77% strongly disagree respectively. Therefore a
majority of the Library professionals agree with management’s recognition of
library professional’s suggestions.

194
Library professionals’ Opinion on Management recognition of
suggestions
No.of Standard
Category Mean t- value
Respondents Deviation
Married 49 1.816327 0.754803
0.8159
Unmarried 4 1.5 0.57735
t (df: 51)=0.815939 p > .05
Ho: Null Hypothesis
The Satisfaction level about Management’s recognition of suggestions
by married and unmarried Library Professionals is not different.
In this study, t-test is applied to find a mean different level about
Management’s recognition of suggestions of the married and unmarried
Library Professionals. The result shows that there is no significant different in
satisfaction levels of married and unmarried Library Professionals.

195
Figure 4. 17
Response of management towards suggestions of users
Response of management towards suggestions of users

196
Table 4. 84
Flexibility of Job as reported by Librarians
No.of
Respondents
1. Agree 24 45.29
3. Disagree 2 3.77
Total 53 100
Table 4.84 shows that 45.29% of the respondents agree that their job
as being flexible, 43.40% strongly agree, 3.77% disagree and further 3.77%
strongly disagree respectively. In this study, 3.77% do not express any
comments. Hence most of the respondents agree that their job as being
flexible.
197
Table 4. 85
Salary as a means of motivation in the library
No.of
Respondents
1. Agree 20 37.74
3. Disagree 2 3.77
4. Strongly Disagree - -
Total 53 100
Table 4.85 shows that 37.74% of the respondents agree that their
salary is the means of motivation in the library, 47.17% of the respondents
strongly agree and 3.77% disagree respectively. In this study, 11.32% of the
respondents do not express any comments. Hence majority of the
respondents agree that salary as means of motivation in the library activities.

198
Table 4. 86
Regular training needed for Library staff
No.of
Respondents
1. Agree 38 71.70
3. Disagree 4 7.55
5. No Comments - -
Total 53 100
Table 4.86 reports that 71.70% of the Library professionals agree that
regular training for staff must be provided by the university/ library authority,
20.75% of the respondents strongly agree, 7.55% disagree respectively. In
this case, nobody report that the option strongly disagree. Therefore majority
of the respondents agree that regular training for staff is to be provided by the
authority.
199
Table 4. 87
Mistakes are rarely made while responding to user’s requests
No.of
Respondents
1. Agree 24 45.28
3. Disagree 5 9.44
Total 53 100
Table 4.87 shows that 45.28% of the respondents agree that mistakes
are rarely made while responding to the user’s request, 7.55% of the
respondents strongly agree, 9.44% disagree, 3.77% strongly disagree
respectively. 33.96% of the respondents do not express any comments.
Hence 52.83% of the Library Professionals agree that mistakes are rarely
made while responding to user’s requests.

200
Table 4. 88
Service delivery and workers empowerment
No. of
S. No. Options Percentage
Respondents
1. Agree 33 62.26
3. Disagree - -
Total 53 100
Table 4.88 expresses that 62.26% of the respondents agree with the
Quality service delivery is due to workers empowerment, 30.19% strongly
agree. In this study, nobody report the options disagree and strongly disagree.
7.55% of the respondents do not express any comments. Hence 92.45% of
the respondent agree that Quality service delivery is due to workers
empowerment.
201
Table 4. 89
Role of employees in decision making
No.of
Respondents
1. Agree 30 56.60
3. Disagree - -
Total 53 100
Table 4.89 expresses that 56.60% of the respondents agree with
employees are involved in decision making, 32.08% strongly agree. In this
study, nobody reports the options disagree and strongly disagree. Six
respondents (11.32%) do not express any comments. Therefore majority of
the respondents agree that employees must be involved in decision making.

202
Table 4. 90
Library professionals’ suggestions taken into account for decision
making in the library
No.of
S.No. No.of times Percentage
Respondents
1. 1 Time 27 50.95
2. 2 Times 8 15.09
3. 3 Times 6 11.32
4. 5 Times 12 22.64
Total 53 100
Table 4.90 shows that 50.95% of the respondents report that 1 time
theirs suggestions have been taken into account in decision making in the
University library, 15.09% report that 2 times, 11.32% report that 3 times and
22.64% report that 5 times. Hence most of the library professionals report that
atleast one time their suggestions have been taken into account in decision
making.
203
Table 4. 91
Quality in the service rendered by library professionals to the users
No.of
Respondents
1. Agree 29 54.72
3. Disagree - -
Total 53 100
Table 4.91 discusses that 54.72% respondents agree that users see a
high standard of quality in the service rendered to the users, 37.73% report
that strongly agree. Nobody disagreed. In this study, 7.55% do not express
any comments. Hence most of the respondents agree that users see a high
standard of quality in the service rendered to the users.

204
Table 4. 92
Response about Library professionals’ services by the users
No.of
Respondents
1. Agree 6 11.32
3. Disagree 20 37.73
Total 53 100
with Users complain about their services, 7.55% strongly agree, 37.73%
disagree and 18.87% strongly disagree respectively. Thirteen respondents
(24.53%) do not express any comments. Hence 18.87% of the library
professionals agree with users complain about their services.

205
Table 4. 93
Users response abou the Library professionals’ services to others
No. of
Respondents
1. Agree 41 77.36
3. Disagree 4 7.55
Total 53 100
Table 4.93 shows that 77.36% of the Library professionals agree with
Library users recommend their services to others, 7.55% strongly agree,
7.55% disagree and 3.77% strongly disagree and two respondents (3.77%)
do not express any comments. Hence most of the Library professionals agree
that users must recommend their services to others.

206
Table 4. 94
Library’s response to user’s complaints
No.of
Respondents
1. Agree 40 75.47
3. Disagree - -
Total 53 100
Table 4.94 shows that 75.47% of the respondents agree with Library
responds quickly to user’s complaints, 13.21% strongly agree, 3.77% strongly
disagree respectively. In this study, 7.55% of the respondents do not express
any comments. Therefore 88.68% of the respondents agree with Library
authority responding quickly to user’s complaints.

207
Table 4. 95
Monitoring system for library services
No.of
Respondents
1. Yes 50 94.34
2. No 3 5.66
Total 53 100
Table 4.95 shows that 94.34% of the respondents report that a
monitoring system is available for library services whereas 5.66% report that
a monitoring system is not available for library services. Hence most of the
respondents accept that a monitoring system is available for effective library
services.
208
Table 4. 96
Library services and its accessibility to users
No.of
Respondents
1. Agree 28 52.83
3. Disagree - -
5. No Comments - -
Total 53 100
Table 4. 96 shows that 52.83% of the respondents agree that Library
services are readily accessible to users and 47.17% of the respondents
strongly agree. Therefore all the respondents agree that Library services are
readily accessible to users.

209
Table 4.97
Employees’ commitment to quality services and its effective operation
No.of
Respondents
1. Agree 27 50.95
3. Disagree 2 3.77
5. No Comments - -
Total 53 100
Table 4.97 shows that 50.95% of the respondents agree with the
employees’ commitment to quality service encourages effective operation of
the university library, 45.28% strongly agree and 3.77% disagree respectively.
Hence most of the library professionals agree with the employee’s
commitment to quality service encourages effective operation of the
university library.
210
Table 4. 98
Library professionals Job flexibility to effective operation
No.of
Respondents
1. Agree 23 43.40
3. Disagree - -
Total 53 100
with job flexibility contributing to the effective operation of the university library
and 20.75% of the respondents strongly agree. In this study, 35.85% of the
respondents do not express any comments. Hence most of the library
professionals agree that job flexibility contribute to the effective operation of
the university library.

10 - Chapter 4

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

10 - Chapter 4

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

80

ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA

This Research is concerned with “A Study on Total Quality

Management of University Libraries in Tamil Nadu". This analysis is based on

run University libraries in Tamilnadu such as: 1. Alagappa University Central

Library, Karaikudi, 2. Bharathiyar University Central Library, Coimbatore,3.

Madurai Kamaraj University Central Library(Dr.T.P.M.Library), 4.

Manonmaniam Sundaranar University Central Library,Tirunelveli, 5.

University of Madras Central Library,Chennai. This chapter deals with the

analysis and interpretation of collected data by employing appropriate

statistical tools and techniques wherever necessary. Further this chapter is

divided into two sections.

Section-1 discusses data collected from the users of the university

Libraries. This chapter discusses the general features of respondents.

Section-II explains data collected from the University Library

Demographic characteristics of Library users –Gender and Age

Gender Male 256 51.2

Female 244 48.8

Total 500 100

Age 20- 25 years 342 68.4

41 and above 7 1.4

Total 500 100

Table 4. 1 shows the Demographic characteristics of Library users. In

48.8% of the respondents belong to the category of female. Hence most of

category of users to use the university library.

Demographic characteristics of Library users –Gender and Age

Demographic characteristics of Library users –Marital status and

Urban 148 29.6

Table 4.2 describes the Demographic characteristics of Library users

respondents (19.8%) belong to the category of married whereas 401

respondents (80.2%) belong to unmarried. Hence most of the respondents

belong to the category of unmarried who use the university libraries.

Among the overall 500 respondents, 70.4% of the respondents belong

who use the university library.

Demographic characteristics of Library users –Qualification and Status

Qualification PG 309 61.8

M.Phil 128 25.6

Total 500 100

Status Faculty Member 28 5.6

M.Phil Scholar 93 18.6

Total 500 100

Table 4.3 describes Demographic characteristics of Library users such

61.8% of the library users belong to PG qualification, 25.6% belong to M.Phil

qualification and 8.4% belong to Ph.D qualification. Hence most of Post

graduate respondents use the university libraries.

university library services.

Frequency of visit to the Library

2. Once in two days 41 8.2

3. Once in three days 43 8.6

4. Weekly 107 21.4

Total 500 100

Source: Primary data

monthly 5% visit occasionally. Hence half of the respondents visit regularly in

encourage all the users to use the university library regularly.

Frequency of visit the library

4. P.G..First year 78 5 12 40 6 6 147

Source: Primary data

4.30% visit occasionally. Therefore three fourth of the M.Phil research

Time spent for searching information

2. 06-10 hrs 89 17.8

3. 11-20 hrs 23 4.6

4. More than 20 hrs 11 2.2