現今環境服務業發展十分蓬勃，消費者對於服務品質的要求日益升高，公共圖書館從業人員也將提升服務品質視為努力的目標。本研究以使用者角度來探討使用者在館員服務、圖書館資源及圖書館空間三面向之理想期望值與實際感受值是否有顯著差異，期望透過研究結果，做為公共圖書館改善服務品質的參考。本研究以雲林縣L鄉立圖書館為研究對象，利用問卷調查法進行，調查使用者對於館員服務、圖書館資源及圖書館空間三大面向共22個題目之理想期望與實際感受。研究結果顯示，使用者在圖書館館員服務、圖書館資源及圖書館空間三大面向之理想期望值與實際感受值均有顯著差異，表示現今之圖書館的服務品質與民眾期待確實存有落差。經由統計分析發現，在理想期望值方面，以「圖書館空間」面向期望最高，最低的是「圖書館資源」面向；在實際感受值方面，以「圖書館空間」面向感受值最高，最低的是「圖書館資源」面向；在服務理想度(理想期望值－實際感受值)方面，以「館員服務」面向的理想度最高，「圖書館空間」最低。茲將此調查結論與建議提供給公共圖書館，藉以做為改善服務品質與分配資源之參考。 As the service sector flourishes, consumers have ever higher standards for service qualities. Employees in public libraries in turn will also strive hard to improve their service qualities. With the hope that the study may provide a basis for public libraries to improve their service qualities, this study seeks to understand whether there exist significant differences between expectations and actual experiences relating to the quality of librarian services, the library's collections and resources, and the physical environment and library facilities. Using the Llibrary in Yunlin County as subject, the study investigates library users’ expectations and actual experiences relating to the quality of services, the library's collections and resources, and the physical environment and library facilities with a survey that contains 22 questions. The study shows that expectations and actual experiences differ significantly in all three aspects, illustrating that there is indeed a gap between present service quality and that expected by library users. Statistical analysis shows that library users have the highest expectation for “physical environment and library facilities” and lowest one for “library’s collections and resources” in terms of expectation, while users’ actual experiences are best in the dimension of “physical environment and library facilities” and worst in the dimension of “library’s collections and resources”. In terms of idealness (optimality) (expectation less actual experience), “quality of services” is most ideal while “physical environment and library facilities” is least ideal. The conclusion and suggestions are provided to public libraries in the hope that it could serve as a reference for improving service qualities and distributing resources.
