Library of Birmingham Customer Research
On-site survey of visitors
Prepared for

Final Version

3December 2014

1. Executive summary

1.1 Purpose

The aim of the research was to gain a better understanding of who is using the Library of Birmingham, where they are coming from, what they are doing when they visit and what they think of the Library in terms of current and future provision to inform future management decisions.

1.2 Approach used

A total of 1,027 face-to-face interviews were conducted at the Library with visitors exiting the building in October 2014. Interviews were spread across Library opening hours over different days of the week and weekends to ensure a good representation of visitors. The survey typically lasted 10 minutes and was conducted on an ‘every nth’ person basis to obtain a random sample of visitors.

1.3 Key findings

  • The majority of visitors are aged between 18 and 59 years with a high proportion of employed individuals, students or those studying. The survey points towards a higher proportion of visitors being male (61:39) although the results do not suggest that females are in anyway being discouraged from visiting the Library or not having an equally rewarding experience. In fact females are more likely than males to say their visit was very enjoyable.
  • A high proportion (57%) of all visitors are members of BCC Libraries and there is evidence to show the Library of Birmingham is attracting residents from local wards who also visit their own local libraries (particularly Harborne Library).
  • The visitor demographic profile is broadly similar to the populations of Ladywood Ward and Birmingham as a whole, with no groups excluded or significantly underrepresented.
  • The Library has a strong draw on the local population with 81% of visitors located within 27.5km of the Library, 8% from Ladywood Ward, 63% from Birmingham District and 79% from the wider West Midlands Metropolitan County. A fifth of visitors come from outside the local region.
  • Visitors come from 39 of the 40 Birmingham wards; around half from the eight wards nearest to the Library.
  • Three quarters of visitors are repeat visitors, 43% frequent in terms of visiting at least once a week (rising to 71% of Ladywood Ward visitors). Frequent visitors are more likely to be coming alone, to study, or hold BCC Library membership. They also comprise a higher proportion of non-white ethnic groups (49%) than first time visitors (14%) or the ‘typical’ Library visitor (36%).
  • Visitors come to the Library for a wide variety of reasons not just to use it to study, borrow books or use reference materials. For example to use the computers and go online, explore or visit the Library and its outside spaces.It is clear that the Library is acting as a tourist destination with 30% of visitors coming solely for these purposes (‘home’ tourism represents 9% of all visitors).
  • It is encouraging to see evidence that visitors are doing more things whilst in the Library than they originally planned to do, for example, accessing the internet, using the Children’s Library or Café. Visitors in full time education are not purely coming to study; a quarter are there simply to explore, visit or enjoy the Library space.
  • Nearly all (94%) Library visitors rated their visit as enjoyable, with only 1% (or 8 visitors of the 1,027 interviewed) rating it as disappointing. Overall ratings of different aspects of service provision are very high; the proportion rating any aspect as excellent does not fall below 50% and nearly all the remainder rate it as good. Staff, internet access and the Library environment are rated especially highly. Most visitors get what they need from their visit.
  • These positive ratings are reflected in high levels of satisfaction with customer experience, only a very small minority are critical with respect to staff’s customer service skills. This has the effect of very high levels of visitors likely to revisit and recommend the Library to others.
  • Provision of resources (whether for borrowing or reference) are regarded as the most important aspects of Library provision. This is closely followed by internet access, providing general information and study spaces. Different user groups have different needs however, for example those visiting with younger people place more importance on children’s resources and activities, students on study spaces and tourists on galleries and exhibitions.
  • Although they reflect quite small numbers, suggestions and comments provided by visitors included:
  • Stock availability and range (increasing generally and for specific subjects, newspapers and magazines, perception that too many books are reference only)
  • Noise and ambience (the need for more quiet zones, areas, rooms, booths or study places, general noise levels with some stating the Library should be quieter with fewer announcements and possibly some areas to be mobile free or to stop the usage of mobile phones altogether)
  • Signage and information provision (ensuring it is clear on entering the Library, distinguishing different areas and helping visitors to locate books)
  • Greater provision/availability of computers
  • Increase staff availability/numbers and for a minority to improve staff knowledge and customer service skills.

1.4 Suggestions

Overall the survey results present a very positive picture for the Library of Birmingham with high levels of visitor satisfaction, enjoyment and advocacy. The Library is attracting a good mix of the local, regional and wider population and is acting as a learning centre, Library and tourist destination for many. Consequently it is quite hard to identify any areas in need of significant improvement. It is more a case of:

  • Avoiding complacency and continuing to maintain excellent customer service across all aspects.
  • Not ‘riding the wave’ in terms of relying on first impressions of the Library for visitors and tourists given the high levels of return rates for first time visitors who will likely return with higher expectations and different demands on subsequent visits.
  • Continuing to do what you do rather than doing anything significantly different. Perhaps focussing on certain aspects of provision where there are more visitors rating it as good than excellent to try and further increase satisfaction levels, for example promoting the range and availability of resources and services and addressing the issues of noise and ambience.
  • Raising awareness of certain aspects of provision such as internet access, events and outside spaces.
  • Appreciating the varying needs of different user groups even if they represent smaller numbers of overall visitors (such as under 18 year olds and those with children); don’t just focus for example on the needs of those coming to study or to use the computer facilities.

Table of contents

1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY2

1.1 Purpose2

1.2 Approach used2

1.3 Key findings2

1.4 Suggestions3

2. INTRODUCTION5

2.1 Aim and objectives5

2.2 Approach5

3. CUSTOMER PROFILE8

3.1 Customer demographics8

3.2 Comparing visitor demographics with the wider population11

4. VISITOR PATTERNS14

4.1 Where visitors originate from14

4.2 Type of visit20

5. USAGE OF THE LIBRARY AND ITS SERVICES23

5.1 Reasons for visiting23

5.2 What visitors use in the Library25

5.3 Usage profile of local, regional and national visitors31

6. SATISFACTION WITH THE LIBRARY AND ITS SERVICES32

6.1 Overall rating32

6.2 Rating aspects of Library provision32

6.3 Rating the Wolfson Centre and Gallery36

7. CUSTOMER EXPERIENCE37

7.1 Staff contact37

7.1 Revisiting and advocacy38

8. IMPORTANCE OF SERVICES AND PROVISION40

9. VISITOR SUGGESTIONS AND COMMENTS44

APPENDIX45

Questionnaire and topline results

2. Introduction

2.1 Aim and objectives

The aim of the research was to gain a better understanding of who is using the Library of Birmingham, where they are coming from and what they are doing when they visit to inform future management decisions. Specific objectives included capturing information in the following areasto help build a more complete picture of library users:

  • how customers spend their time (both doing what they originally intended to do and any additional unplanned activities during their visit)
  • whether they find what they need
  • whether they purchase anything (and if so how much they spend)
  • how they rate the library in terms of its services, resources and customer experience
  • what services and aspects are important to them from the Library
  • general thoughts on the library environment and provision,
  • other vital demographic information such as age, gender, employment status, ethnicity.

2.2 Approach

A total of 1,027 face-to-face interviews (632 on weekdays and 395 on weekends) were conducted between 2/10/14and 23/10/14 (Phase one) and 25/10/14 and 29/10/14 (Phase two).The split in fieldwork was to ensure half-term visitors were included in the survey to get a broader range of Library users. A total of 41 survey shifts were spread across Library opening hours over different days of the week and weekends.

Day / Shift Times / Number of shifts / Interviews achieved
Weekdays / 11.00-17.00 / 15 / 383
Weekdays / 13.30-19.30 / 6 / 144
Weekdays / 09.00-15.00 / 4 / 105
Saturdays / 10.30-16.30 / 12 / 311
Sundays / 11.00-16.00 / 4 / 84
Weekdays / - / 25 / 632
Weekends / - / 16 / 395
Total / - / 41 / 1,027

Figure 2.1: Shift schedule

The survey was conducted on-site at the Library of Birmingham using a survey preprogramed on to computer tablets and with visual showcards to assist respondents; this provided a more engaging interface with visitors but also meant data was more accurately captured and processed. The survey typically lasted 10 minutes and was conducted on an ‘every nth’ person basis as they exited the Library to obtain a random sample of visitors. Exit interviews were conducted to enable us to ask about customers’ experiences (satisfaction, spend, time spent, likelihood to return etc.) and actual usage during their visit. No demographic quotas were set on the interviews.

It should be noted that the interviewers were not able to target under 16 year olds directly, only in the presence of and with the permission of an accompanying adult. In practice, this resulted in few interviews with this age group because:

  • During the weekday shifts there are very few around. The children that are around tend to be school parties with a teacher who generally will not give permission.
  • There are a very few aged 15-16, but these mainly refuse.
  • Under 16’s could not be targeted if on their own or visiting just with peers.
  • The children with parents tend to be much younger (under 8's) and parents complete the interview from their perspective as they say the child wouldn't understand the questions.
  • Weekend numbers were higher but the same applies as above.

Consequently the proportion of under 16’s in the overall visitor profile identified in this survey (3%) is likely to be an underestimate.

The questions were predominantly closed i.e. presenting a list of choice options to respondents, but opportunity to provide more open suggestions or comments was provided. A key question was obtaining the full postcode of every respondent where possible to accurately determine where visitors are originating from. Most questions were framed in terms of the visitor’s experience on the day of interview. A marked up version of the questionnaire with headline percentages for each question is shown at the end of the report.

A total sample size of 1,027 interviews is large enough to provide sufficient confidence in the results overall and to enable the findings to be drilled down by different sub-groups (such as by different ages or purpose of visit). On the basis of their being around 3 million visitors since opening, with a sample size of 1,027, the accuracy of results at the 95% confidence level would be around 3%; i.e. you would be 95% confident that a particular survey result is +/- 3% from the true population value.

3. Customer profile

3.1 Customer demographics

The majority of visitors are aged between 18 and 59 years (Fig 3.1). Typically under 18’s account for around one in ten visitors however it should be noted that those aged under 16 were not targeted directly for interviews unless they were accompanied by an adult (and even then it was typically the adult who responded rather than the child; see Section 2.2, page 7). Therefore the 3% figure is likely to be an underestimate.

The survey suggests a higher proportion of visitors are male (Fig 3.1). It is important to note here that the interviews were conducted on a random basis (every nth person passing an interviewer) and conducted by interviewers of both sexes to overcome potential bias on targeting either gender more favourably. The profile of visitors by gender was fairly consistent across weekdays and weekends. Additionally we encountered very few refusals. Without any total visitor counts providing evidence to the contrary there is no sound basis on which to expect the profile to be any different or to weight the data to any particular profile (e.g. the UK 49%:51% male:female ratio). Even if we were to weight our 61%:39% sample profile to the UK profile it has little or no effect on the overall results or findings within each gender. It is possible that the 61%:39% ratio is too subtle a difference to have been picked up anecdotally or noticed by staff at the Library. The gender split might be worth exploring further for example by conducting a detailed headcount at the Libraryto further quantify proportions.

What is more important is that we have good representation from both genders enabling us to examine differences in usage and perceptions between sexes. For example females are more likely than males to come accompanied, be in full time education, visit more areas of the Library, and have greater expectations of the Library in terms of the importance they place on nearly all aspects of provision asked about in the survey (see Section 8). However, they are more likely than men to find their visit very enjoyable despite these high expectations. They are less likely to use the Library computers or access the internet than males.

Two-fifths of visitors are employed in some way and a third in full-time education (Fig 3.2). Trends are as expected; younger visitors are more likely to be in education, older visitors working and so on.

The ethnicity of visitors is fairly evenly split between White British (53%) and other ethnic groups (47%); 12% of visitors described themselves as ‘White other’, 16% from Asian ethnic groups and 15% from Black ethnic groups. The remainder described being of mixed ethnicity (Fig 3.3).

Nearly 3 in 5 visitors to the Library are members of Birmingham City Council Libraries and a quarter of visitors regularly use other Birmingham City Council libraries (3.4). These visitors use a range of other libraries across the city; in fact only three libraries were not mentioned; Kents Moat, West Heath or mobile libraries. The most commonly mentioned were Harborne, Balsall Heath, Kings Heath and Sutton Coldfield. The remainder were each mentioned in quite small numbers (see Fig 3.5).80% of visitors from Ladywood Ward are BCC library members (compared with 77% of Birmingham visitors overall) but only 15% regularly use other BCC libraries (compared with 31% of Birmingham visitors overall).

Under 18s are least likely to regularly use other libraries (15%) as are those who are visiting the Library of Birmingham as a tourist (8%). Visitors aged 25-39 are significantly more likely than those aged over 60 to be members of BCC Libraries (61% vs 49%); however membership is broadly similar across other ages. Fewer first time visitors or tourists are likely to be members (12% and 15%, respectively) as perhaps expected. Interestingly, there is a significantly higher proportion of visitors with BCC Library membership on a weekday than a weekend (69% vs 38%). The reason for this difference is unclear but is likely due to the higher proportions of visitors coming to the library for more tourist reasons on a weekend (48%) than a weekday (19%).

3.2Comparing visitor demographicswith the wider population

Figure 3.6 compares the profile of Library Visitors with Census 2011 data for Ladywood Ward (the ward in which the Library of Birmingham is located), Birmingham and England as a whole across certain demographics. Data is not directly comparable in all cases so readers are encouraged to read the footnotes to see where question wording differed in the Library survey. Nevertheless the figures are broadly comparable.

Arguably there is no reason why the visitor profile would or should be a direct reflection of the wider catchment area – a library will always be more or less attractive to different people. However, it is encouraging to see the following described below showing the Library is not excluding any demographic groups occurring either locally or further away.

Ladywood Ward includes the city centre of Birmingham and an area to the west of it. It has a much younger age profile than the City average. The percentage of ethnic minority residents is above the city average, and unemployment is similar to the city average.

Given the relatively small sample size on which the Ladywood Ward visitor profile is based (n=75) a degree of error is expected around the results which may account for some of the differences in profile with the Ward population as a whole. Nevertheless, the age profile of visitors from Ladywood Ward above 18 years is broadly similar to that of the population of Ladywood Ward (especially those aged 18-39). No age groups are excluded or significantly underrepresented.

As we move further out from Ladywood Ward to Birmingham as a whole, the difference in the younger age profile (16-24 years) becomes more pronounced.

Ladywood Ward overall has a higher proportion of males than females (55% vs 45%) compared with the other wards nearby (such as Soho, Aston, Nechells and Edgbaston which are themselves much closer to the national profile). The higher concentration of males in Ladywood Ward is reflected in our visitor profile.

With the exception of ‘other ethnic groups’, all ethnic groups are well represented in the visitor profile. The data however, suggests that Black ethnic groups are overrepresented and Asian ethnic groups underrepresented in the visitor profile compared with Ladywood Ward and Birmingham as a whole. The difference in Asian ethnic groups is particularly pronounced at the Ladywood Ward level.It is of note that the Library offers resources in the area of Black History which may be encouraging visitors from Black ethnic groups to visit.