한국문헌정보학회지 (Journal of the Korean Society for Library and Information Science)

한국문헌정보학회 (Korean Society For Library And Information Science)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

해외 공공도서관의 성과평가 동향과 사례 연구

International Trends in Public Library Performance Evaluation

  • 투고 : 2021.05.08
  • 심사 : 2021.05.24
  • 발행 : 2021.05.31
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

본 연구는 최근 공공도서관 성과평가의 국제적 동향과 해외 성과평가 실무 동향을 조사할 목적으로 수행되었다. 문헌조사를 통해 성과평가에서 현재 주류적으로 적용되는 이론모델로 논리모델을 검토하는 한편 해외 공공도서관 성과평가 실제를 미국 동부 세 지역의 공공도서관을 직접 방문하여 심층면담을 수행함으로써 사례조사하였다. 연구 결과, 2010년 전후부터 국제 도서관계의 성과평가는 도서관이 지역주민의 삶과 지역사회에 미치는 실제적 영향력을 측정하는 경향이 주류를 이루며 이를 실질적으로 지원할 수 있는 방법을 제시하는 노력이 계속되어 온 것으로 파악된다. 측정방법에 대한 국제 가이드라인과 함께 국가 차원의 성과지표 개발 노력 역시 활발하다. 개별 공공도서관들도 그 지역의 발전계획에 따라 전략목표를 수립하고 도서관 성과도 그에 따라 측정하는 경향이 뚜렷했다. 기존의 단순 산출지표를 넘어 장기적으로 지역주민 삶과 지역발전을 위해 어떤 변화를 만들었는지 그 영향력을 측정하는 성과지표가 강조되고 있었다. 그러나 성과평가 실무에서 활용되는 영향지표는 여전히 미흡하여 풀어야 할 과제로 남아 있다.

The purpose of this study is to examine international trends in performance evaluation of public libraries. We examined major theoretical models for performance evaluation and its measurement guidelines and tools in the literature. We also conducted case studies to investigate actual practices in major regional public library systems in the United States. In-depth interviews with library staff were conducted in three large U.S. public library systems along with analyses of both internal and public documents. The results of the study inform that the most noticeable trend of performance evaluation was to assess the impact of public library in the lives of citizens and the society. Guidelines and methods to measure intangible impact were developed in both international and national levels. These efforts were also found at the local library levels. While the outcome and impact measures were found to be direct reflections of strategic goals of the library systems, actual impact measures have yet to be refined in actual library practices.

키워드

과제정보

본 연구는 2019년 서울시 공공도서관 서비스 실태조사 모델 및 가이드라인 개발 연구의 일환으로 수행되었음.

참고문헌

  1. Lee, S. (2011). A study on the application and use of program logic models: a research and development of evaluation indicators for Secondhand Smoking Free Seoul! Program. Korean Governance Review, 18(1), 211-243. https://doi.org/10.17089/kgr.2011.18.1.009
  2. Chung, S. & Lee, H. (2015). A service level agreement-based performance measurement model of hospital information system: an IT balanced scorecard and logic model approach. Journal of the Korea Management Engineers Society, 20(2), 1-15.
  3. American Library Association (2015). Libraries Transform, an Initiative of the American Library Association. Available: http://www.ilovelibraries.org/librariestransform/
  4. Bickman, L. (1987). The functions of program theory. New Directions for Evaluation, 33, 5-18. https://doi.org/10.1002/ev.1443
  5. Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (2015). Global Libraries Impact Planning and Assessment Guide. Available: http://www.publiclibraryadvocacy.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/IPA-Guide-2015.pdf
  6. Creaser, C. (2018). Assessing the impact of libraries: the role of ISO 16439. Information and Learning Sciences, 119(1/2), 87-93. https://doi.org/10.1108/ILS-05-2017-0037
  7. District of Columbia Public Library Homepage (2021). Available: https://www.dclibrary.org/
  8. Dyehouse, M., Bennett, D., Harbor, J., Childress, A., & Dark, M. (2009). A comparison of linear and systems thinking approaches for program evaluation illustrated using the Indiana lnterdisciplinary GK-12. Evaluation and Program Planning, 32(3), 187-196. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2009.03.001
  9. Fairfax County Public Library Homepage (2021). Available: https://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/library/
  10. Free Library of Philadelphia Homepage (2021). Available: https://www.freelibrary.org/
  11. Hoe, N., Apgar, S., Meyers, A., Pierce , J., & Springstubb, D. (2017). Impact evaluation report. Free Library of Philadelphia. Available: https://libwww.freelibrary.org/assets/pdf/about/impact-evaluation-report.pdf
  12. International Organization for Standardization (2014). ISO 11620:2014. Information and Documentation. Library Performance Indicators. Available: https://www.iso.org/standard/56755.html
  13. International Organization for Standardization (2014). ISO 16439:2014. Information and Documentation: Methods and Procedures for Assessing the Impact of Libraries. Available: https://www.iso.org/standard/56756.html
  14. Kellogg Foundation (2004). Logic Model Development Guide: Using Logic Model to Bring Together Planning Evaluation, and Action. Battle Greek, MI: W. K. Kellogg Foundation.
  15. Matthews, J. (2006). The library balanced scorecard: is it in your future? Public Libraries, 45(6), 64-71.
  16. Matthews, J. (2015). Assessing outcomes and value: it's all a matter of perspective. Performance Measurement and Metrics, 16(3), 211-233. https://doi.org/10.1108/PMM-10-2015-0034
  17. Matthews, J. (2018). Management frameworks and the broader perspective. Public Library Quarterly, 37(3), 263-278. https://doi.org/10.1080/01616846.2017.1399764
  18. McLaughlin, J. & Jordan, G. (1999). Logic models: a tool for telling your program's performance story. Evaluation and Program Planning, 22, 65-72. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0149-7189(98)00042-1
  19. National Impact Evaluation Group (2013). Impact of Libraries. Available: https://wiki.helsinki.fi/display/arvi/Theory
  20. New York Public Library. Homepage (2021). Available: https://www.nypl.org/
  21. Orr, R. (1973). Measuring the goodness of library services. Journal of Documentation, 29(3), 315-52. https://doi.org/10.1108/eb026561
  22. Public Library Association (2017). Project Outcome: 2017 Annual Report. Available: https://www.projectoutcome.org/ckeditor_assets/attachments/359/pla-projectoutcome-2-year-annual-report-final.pdf
  23. Rochester Public Library Logic Model (2021). Available: https://www.wilder.org/wilder-research/research-library/rochester-public-library-logic-model