Dar al hikmah library, iiumcustomer satisfaction survey report2025
Dar al hikmah library, iium customer satisfaction survey report2025 executive summary ccs 2025
1 2025 CUSTOMER SATISFACTION SURVEY DAR AL-HIKMAH LIBRARY INTERNATIONAL ISLAMIC UNIVERSITY MALAYSIA EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The 2025 Library Customer Satisfaction Survey assessed clients' satisfaction and their experiences across five key areas: Information Resources, Services, Facilities & Equipment, Library Staff, and Communication & Promotion. The questionnaire was revised from the 2024 version to better reflect current needs and to gather more comprehensive feedback on existing facilities and services. Conducted across five campus libraries using systematic random sampling, with the sample size determined using the Raosoft Sample Size Calculator, the survey received 1,565 responses, exceeding the target of 1,456 and ensuring reliable representation of library users as illustrated in Figure 1. Figure 1: Infographic survey methodology and participation overview Key Findings: Figure 2 and Table 1 illustrate positive satisfaction with library services across campus libraries. The analysis of mean scores across five core categories: i) Information Resources, ii) Library Services, iii) Facilities & Equipment, iv) Library Staff, and v) Communication & Promotion, demonstrated that all recorded scores exceed the institutional target mean of 4.00. This indicated a satisfactory level of client experience and service delivery.
2 Figure 2: Infographic of the mean score for five categories according to campus libraries Table 1: The Mean Score for five categories according to campus libraries CATEGORIES M.K.H Library & IIiBF DaHL Kuantan SMNA Library DaHL CFS SFL Pagoh OVERALL Information Resources 4.22 4.22 4.79 4.28 4.56 4.41 Library Services 4.27 4.19 4.70 4.34 4.57 4.41 Facilities & Equipment 4.18 4.20 4.30 4.44 4.57 4.36 Library staff 4.41 4.40 4.76 4.49 4.58 4.53 Communication & Promotion 4.25 4.25 4.73 4.39 4.57 4.44 OVERALL 4.27 4.25 4.66 4.39 4.57 4.43 SMNA Library recorded the highest overall satisfaction score (4.66), followed by SFL Pagoh (4.57) and DaHL CFS (4.39), while M.K. H Library & IIiBF (4.27) and DaHL Kuantan (4.25) achieved slightly lower yet still satisfactory ratings. Notably, SMNA Library led in four of the five categories: Information Resources, Library Services, Library Staff, and Communication & Promotion. This position might be considered as a benchmark for best practices, while SFL Pagoh excelled in Facilities & Equipment and matched SMNA Library in Communication & Promotion. DaHL CFS performed moderately above the institutional average, whereas M.K. H Library & IIiBF and DaHL Kuantan registered comparatively lower satisfaction levels, with DaHL Kuantan being the lowest-scoring campus. Overall, the findings affirmed that the library meets the client expectations across all categories, while highlighting the need for targeted improvements in Information Resources and Facilities & Equipment. High-performing campuses such as SMNA Library can serve as models to guide continuous service enhancement across the library system.
3 Figure 3: Infographic of the overall mean score for five categories, 2022-2025 Figure 4: The overall mean score for five categories, 2022-2025 Figures 3 and 4 illustrate the overall mean scores for five key service categories from 2022 to 2025, reflecting consistently strong and stable performance, with all categories exceeding the institutional benchmark of 4.00. The findings demonstrated the library’s sustained commitment to quality service delivery and a consistently high level of client satisfaction over time. Among the categories, Library Staff consistently achieved the highest satisfaction ratings, with an increase to 4.53 in 2025. This indicates strong performance and enhanced client engagement. Library Services and Information Resources remained stable from 2022 to 2024 before showing a significant improvement in 2025 (both reaching 4.41), reflecting better service 4.23 4.25 4.14 4.41 4.27 4.25 4.29 4.20 4.40 4.28 4.22 4.26 4.23 4.38 4.28 4.41 4.41 4.36 4.53 4.44 3.9 4 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.6 Information Resources Library Services Facilities & Equipment Library Staff Communication & Promotion OVEALL MEAN SCORE FOR FIVE CATEGORIES 2022 - 2025 2022 2023 2024 2025
4 accessibility and resource relevance. Facilities & Equipment recorded the most substantial overall improvement, rising from 4.14 in 2022 to 4.36 in 2025, highlighting successful enhancements in infrastructure. Similarly, Communication & Promotion showed steady performance before increasing to 4.44 in 2025, indicating improved outreach and engagement strategies. Overall, the results confirm sustained service excellence, with strategic improvements contributing to enhanced client satisfaction, particularly in 2025. Figure 5: Infographic of the overall mean score for campus libraries, 2022 -2025 Figure 6: The overall mean score for all campuses, 2022 -2025 4.19 4.30 4.29 4.27 4.25 4.13 4.45 4.33 4.40 4.20 4.10 4.12 4.72 4.37 4.03 4.27 4.25 4.66 4.39 4.57 3.6 3.8 4 4.2 4.4 4.6 4.8 M.K.H Library & IIiBF DaHL Kuantan SMNA Library DaHL CFS SFL Pagoh OVERALL MEAN SCORE FOR ALL CAMPUSES 2022 - 2025 2022 2023 2024 2025
5 The customer satisfaction data from 2022 to 2025 across campus libraries indicate consistently high levels of client satisfaction, with all campuses maintaining scores above the institutional benchmark of 4.00. While performance remained generally stable with moderate variations between campuses from 2022 to 2024, a clear upward trend in 2025 reflects strengthened service delivery and enhanced client experience, as illustrated in Figures 5 and 6. SMNA Library consistently recorded the highest satisfaction levels, peaking at 4.72 in 2024 before a slight decline to 4.66 in 2025, while still maintaining top performance. DaHL CFS demonstrated strong consistency with minimal variation and a steady increase to 4.39 in 2025. DaHL Kuantan showed moderate fluctuations but maintained overall strong satisfaction with 4.25 in 2025, whereas M.K.H Library & IIiBF experienced a slight decline before recovering in 2025 with 4.27. Notably, SFL Pagoh exhibited the greatest variability, with a significant improvement to 4.57 in 2025, representing the largest single-year increase and indicating substantial enhancements in service quality and user engagement. In conclusion, the survey demonstrated that the library has maintained a high standard of service delivery across campuses, with impressive signs of improvement in recent performance. Continued focus on addressing campus-specific variations and sustaining best practices from high-performing campuses such as the SMNA Library will be essential in ensuring consistent excellence across the institution. Figure 7: Infographic number of library entries by campus libraries 2025
6 Figure 8: Number of library entries by campus libraries 2025 To assess customer satisfaction, it is also important to consider the volume of clients visiting each campus library. As illustrated in Figure 8, the analysis of library entry findings for 2025 indicated strong overall engagement with library facilities, with usage patterns reflecting the academic calendar and student activity cycles across all campuses. In addition, the total annual volume exceeding 370,000 entries demonstrated that the library remains a critical academic support facility for teaching, learning, and research. M.K.H Library & IIiBF reported consistently as the highest contributor to total library entries throughout the year. In May, the indicated peak usage was 27,439, followed by January (27,275) and December (26,532). These three (3) months' achievements are indicated as the primary hub for academic and research activities. DaHL CFS indicated as the second highest contributor with significant fluctuations. Peak usage observed August (20,038), May (17,740), and October (16,124). The SMNA Library showed moderate and steady usage across the year. The highest number of entries was recorded in December (1,625) and November (1,469). In contrast, DaHL Kuantan and SFL Pagoh recorded comparatively low library entry figures in 2025. The low usage at DaHL Kuantan can be attributed to the library’s temporary location at Jalan Hospital, which is situated at a considerable distance from student hostels and academic facilities. In addition, transportation constraints have limited students’ access to the library, resulting in lower visitation rates. Nevertheless, both DaHL Kuantan and SFL Pagoh should strengthen client engagement through targeted outreach programmes, promotional activities, and client-focused initiatives to enhance library visibility and increase library entries. Overall, the findings indicated that while library services are highly valued and extensively utilized at major campuses, there is a need to enhance outreach and service delivery at some campuses to ensure a more balanced and inclusive number of clients enter and experience across the institution. 27275 9753 13567 23405 27439 25208 7514 5509 3707 24288 22094 26532 407 385 127 829 1165 1169 1426 1320 834 1216 1469 1625 241 167 100 192 242 266 180 164 86 132 216 151 11817 14820 789 9836 17740 6765 10935 20038 10544 16124 4561 13551 57 39 108 123 272 216 7 21 5 326 422 503 0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 30000 JAN FEB MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE JULY AUG SEPT OCT NOV DEC NUMBER OF LIBRARY ENTRIES ALL CAMPUSES 2025 M.K.H. Library & IIiBF SMNA Library DaHL Kuantan DaHL CFS SFL Pagoh
7 Overall Satisfaction: Figure 9: Infographic overall mean score 2022- 2025 Figure 10: Overall mean score 2020 – 2025 The customer satisfaction results from 2022 to 2025 across campus libraries demonstrated consistently high performance, with all campuses maintaining mean scores above the institutional benchmark of 4.00. Overall trends indicate stable performance from 2022 to 2025. SMNA Library consistently achieved the highest satisfaction levels, maintaining its position as the top-performing campus despite minor fluctuations. DaHL CFS showed strong consistency 4.26 4.28 4.28 4.28 4.25 4.255 4.26 4.265 4.27 4.275 4.28 4.285 OVERALL MEAN SCORE 2022 - 2025 2022 2023 2024 2025
8 with minimal variation, while Kuantan and M.K.H Library & IIiBF experienced moderate fluctuations but remained within satisfactory levels. Notably, SFL Pagoh recorded the most significant improvement in 2025, indicating substantial progress in service quality and client engagement. These findings highlight sustained service excellence across campuses, with clear evidence of continuous improvement in meeting client expectations. In conclusion, the findings demonstrated that the library has achieved sustained excellence in overall client satisfaction, maintaining a high-performance benchmark over consecutive years. Moving forward, strategic efforts may focus on innovation, service differentiation, and targeted enhancements to further elevate client experience beyond the current level. Conclusion The 2025 Customer Satisfaction Survey results affirmed that the Dar al-Hikmah Library continues to uphold a quality standard of service delivery across all campuses. With an overall mean score of 4.28, the findings reflect a sustained level of client satisfaction that exceeds the institutional benchmark of 4.00. Analysis across five key service categories, i.e., Information Resources, Services, Facilities & Equipment, Library Staff, and Communication & Promotion, demonstrated consistently positive feedback, with Library Staff receiving the highest satisfaction rating, underscoring the quality of client support provided. Among the campus categories, SMNA Library achieved the highest overall satisfaction score (4.66), showed as an example of library service performance. SFL Pagoh (4.57), M.K.H Library & IiiBF (4.27), DaHL CFS (4.39) and DaHL Kuantan (4.25) have increased their client’s satisfaction as compared to the previous year, 2024. These results indicated that the library has improved its services and facilities for the clients. In addition, M.K.H. Library & IIiBF and DaHL CFS consistently recorded high numbers of visits, reflecting strong client engagement and demand for library services. In contrast, DaHL Kuantan and especially SFL Pagoh experienced relatively low usage throughout the year. Meanwhile, the SMNA Library had steady usage in the year 2025. This indicated that the clients’ interaction with library services is more likely to provide detailed and positive experience-based feedback. In summary, the CSS 2025 results reaffirm the library’s continued commitment to quality while also highlighting the importance of bridging engagement gaps between campuses. Addressing usage disparities, improving visibility, and tailoring services to local client needs will be essential in maintaining equitable satisfaction and advancing library excellence across the campus libraries.
9 Prepared by: Dr. Raudhah Osman Report Writing & Editorial Committee Customer Satisfaction Survey 2025 12.6.2026 Checked by: Siti Hawa Darus Coordinator Customer Satisfaction Survey 2025 15.6.2026 Reviewed by: Nor Hasyimah Mustapa Chief Librarian Dar al-Hikmah Library 17.6.2026
customer satisfaction survey report2025DAR AL-HIKMAH LIBRARY, GOMBAK & IIiBF LIBRARY INTERNATIONAL ISLAMIC UNIVERSITY MALAYSIA prepared by: Dr. zahila mohd nor learning support 2025
2025 CUSTOMER SATISFACTION SURVEY REPORT M. KAMAL HASSAN LIBRARY & IIiBF LIBRARY INTERNATIONAL ISLAMIC UNIVERSITY MALAYSIA Prepared by: DR. RAUDHAH OSMAN LIBRARY ANALYTICS UNIT, ANALYTICS & CORPORATE COLLABORATION DEPARTMENT 2026
i TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES .............................................................................................................................................................................ii LIST OF FIGURES ..........................................................................................................................................................................iii INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................................................ 4 Background ................................................................................................................................................................. 4 Objectives..................................................................................................................................................................... 4 Survey Team ................................................................................................................................................................ 5 METHODOLOGY ........................................................................................................................................................................... 5 Questionnaire Design:................................................................................................................................................. 5 Sampling Technique ................................................................................................................................................... 6 Data Collection: ........................................................................................................................................................... 6 Data Analysis:.............................................................................................................................................................. 6 Reporting ..................................................................................................................................................................... 7 Balance Scorecard Target .......................................................................................................................................... 7 RESULT ............................................................................................................................................................................................ 7 Demographic result ..................................................................................................................................................... 7 Level of satisfaction..................................................................................................................................................... 9 Information resources .............................................................................................................................................. 9 Library services ...................................................................................................................................................... 11 Facilities and equipment ........................................................................................................................................ 13 Library staff ............................................................................................................................................................ 15 Communication and promotion ............................................................................................................................. 17 Overall satisfaction................................................................................................................................................. 20 Frequency and Purposes of Library Visits ............................................................................................................. 22 Purposes of a library visit ...................................................................................................................................... 23 IMPROVEMENT ........................................................................................................................................................................... 25 FINDING ......................................................................................................................................................................................... 26 Means Score 2012-2025 ........................................................................................................................................ 26 Means Score for five categories 2012-2025 ......................................................................................................... 27 CONCLUSION ............................................................................................
ii LIST OF TABLES Table 1: List of 2025 Customer Satisfaction Survey Team M.K.H Library and IIiBF..................................................... 5 Table 2: Number of respondents according to Categories and Status............................................................................... 7 Table 3: A means score for sub-categories of Information Resources .......................................................................... 10 Table 4: A means score for sub-categories of Library Services .................................................................................... 12 Table 5: A Means Scores for Sub-Categories of Facilities & Equipment ..................................................................... 14 Table 6: A means scores for sub-categories of Library Staff ......................................................................................... 16 Table 7: A Means Score for Sub-Categories of Communication & Promotion............................................................. 18 Table 8: Open-ended answers for Improvement from respondents ............................................................................... 25 Table 9: Means Score for five categories 2012-2025 .................................................................................................... 27
iii LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: Number of respondents based on K/C/D/I/O .................................................................................................... 8 Figure 2: Number of respondents based on Gender .......................................................................................................... 8 Figure 3: Number of respondents based on Nationality.................................................................................................... 9 Figure 4: A means score for sub-categories of Information Resources ......................................................................... 10 Figure 5 Overall Means Score for Sub-categories mean score for Information Resources 2022-2025 ......................... 11 Figure 6 A means scores for sub-categories of Library Services .................................................................................. 12 Figure 7 Overall mean score for Sub-categories means score for Library Services ...................................................... 13 Figure 8 A Means Scores for Sub-Categories of Facilities & Equipment ..................................................................... 14 Figure 9 Overall mean score for Sub-Categories of Facilities & Equipment ................................................................ 15 Figure 10 A means scores for sub-categories of Library Staff ...................................................................................... 16 Figure 11 Overall means scores for sub-categories of Library Staff ............................................................................. 17 Figure 12 A means scores for sub-categories of Communication & Promotion ........................................................... 18 Figure 13 Overall means scores for sub-categories of Communication & Promotion .................................................. 19 Figure 14 A Means Score for Overall Satisfaction Level .............................................................................................. 20 Figure 15 Overall Score means for five categories ........................................................................................................ 21 Figure 16 Frequency of Library Visit ............................................................................................................................ 22 Figure 17 Purposes of Library Visit ............................................................................................................................... 23 Figure 18 Overall Purposes of Library Visit .................................................................................................................. 24 Figure 19 Overall Means 2012-2025 ............................................................................................................................. 27
4 INTRODUCTION The report provided an analysis of the Library Customer Satisfaction Survey (CSS), which was conducted to evaluate the level of customer satisfaction and to identify areas for improvement. The survey functions as an important instrument for understanding the perceptions and experiences of library users, offering valuable insights that are essential for enhancing library services. The report presented a comprehensive overview of the survey findings, including satisfaction levels across five key categories; i) Information Resources, ii) Facilities and Equipment, iii) Library Staff, iv) Library Services, and v) Communication & Promotion. Through analysis of the survey, it aimed to support informed decision-making, prioritise improvement initiatives, and promote effective communication between library management and its users. The analysis contributed to the library’s continuous commitment to delivering and sustaining high-quality services and ensuring customer satisfaction. The report focused on a survey conducted at two libraries: the M. Kamal Hassan Library (M.K.H Library) and the IIUM Institute of Islamic Banking and Finance (IIiBF) Library, both situated on the Gombak Campus. The combined population of these libraries consists of 20,390 registered members, as recorded in KOHA, the Library Management System (LMS). Background The Dar al-Hikmah Library has consistently placed a strong emphasis on delivering high-quality services to its clients since its establishment, positioning itself as a user-centred institution committed to excellence. The library continuously strives to enhance its service offerings across all key areas where the Customer Satisfaction Survey serves as a key performance indicator of the library. This initiative reflects the library’s dedication to maintaining service standards, ensuring accountability, and aligning its services with the evolving needs and expectations of its diverse user community. Since 2008, the library has conducted the survey on a biennial basis, providing a structured platform for users to share their feedback, experiences, ideas, and suggestions. This regular engagement enables the library to monitor trends in user satisfaction, identify strengths, and address areas requiring improvement in a timely and strategic manner. The presented report offers a comprehensive analysis of the survey findings, highlighting critical insights into user perceptions and experiences. It also outlined practical recommendations aimed at further enhancing customer satisfaction, strengthening service delivery, and supporting the library’s ongoing commitment to continuous improvement and excellence. Objectives The survey aims to achieve the following objectives: i. Identify areas for improvement in five categories: information resources, services, facilities & equipment, library staff, and communication and promotion. ii. Measure and monitor the library's performance over time. iii. Enable clients to provide feedback for the enhancement of the five categories. iv. Facilitate open and honest communication between clients and the library management,
5 providing clients with the opportunity to express their views openly. Survey Team The survey team for the M.K.H Library and IIiBF in 2025 is comprised of seven members, with the Chief Librarian serving as the team's advisor. The list of committee members is shown in Table 1 below: Table 1: List of 2025 Customer Satisfaction Survey Team M.K.H Library and IIiBF Team member Committee Nor Hasyimah Mustafa Advisor Siti Hawa Darus Coordinator Dr. Raudhah Osman Report writing and editorial Zalirawati Anita Jusoh, Suhani Saarani Survey distribution and collection Irni Izwah Abu Bakar Data compilation & SPSS Suhani Surani Graphic design & special task Syamsul Faizal Wakimon CSS Publication & Promotion METHODOLOGY The 2025 Library Customer Satisfaction Survey utilised a structured questionnaire as the primary instrument for data collection. The survey was designed to obtain valuable feedback and insights from library users regarding their level of satisfaction with various aspects of the library, including information resources, services, facilities and equipment, library staff, and communication and promotional. The methodologies applied in conducting this survey are outlined and discussed in the following paragraphs. Questionnaire Design: The questionnaire was developed to evaluate five key categories of customer satisfaction, namely: i) information resources, ii) services, iii) facilities and equipment, iv) library staff, and v) communication and promotion. The instrument incorporated both closed-ended and open-ended questions to facilitate the collection of quantitative and qualitative data, enabling a more holistic assessment of user satisfaction. The questionnaire has been revised in comparison with the 2024 survey to better reflect the current range of services offered. These revisions included the addition of response options to ensure alignment with existing library services. The questionnaire was organised into two main sections: Part One focuses on respondents’ demographic information, while Part Two assesses satisfaction levels across the five categories; Information Resources, Library Services, Facilities and Equipment, Library Staff, and Communication and Promotion. In addition, the questionnaire included items related to frequency of visits, purpose of visits, and overall satisfaction. Part Two also features an open-ended question to encourage respondents to share their opinions and suggestions. Overall, the survey allowing respondents to provide comprehensive feedback on various aspects of the library. A sample of the questionnaire is provided in Appendix B.
6 Sampling Technique The random sampling technique was employed to provide all library users to participate in the survey. This approach involved selecting respondents at regular intervals from the population of library users across the respective campus, thereby reducing potential bias and enhancing the representativeness of the sample. To ensure an appropriate and balanced distribution of respondents, the Sample Size Calculator developed by Raosoft, Inc. was used to determine the required sample size (Appendix A). In this survey, the recommended sample size was 378 respondents drawn from a total population of 20,390 registered library users, ensuring that the selected sample would accurately represent the characteristics of the overall population. Notably, a total of 427 respondents participated in the survey, exceeding the targeted sample size and thereby enhancing the reliability and robustness of the findings. Data Collection: The questionnaire was distributed to selected respondents, inviting them to provide feedback based on their experiences with the library through both online and physical approach. Additionally for the online distribution platforms such as the IIUM Community email, individual and group WhatsApp messages, and the Friends of the Library Club (FLIC), allowing for convenient access and completion. In addition, printed questionnaires were made available at designated locations, including General Reading Areas and library service counters, to accommodate users with limited access to digital platforms or a preference for manual submission. This dual approach aimed to maximise participation, ensure convenience, and promote inclusiveness by capturing feedback from a diverse range of library users. Data Analysis: Once the data collection phase was completed, all responses were compiled and prepared for analysis. Quantitative data derived from closed-ended questions were analysed using statistical techniques, specifically mean scores, to measure overall customer satisfaction levels. Meanwhile, qualitative data obtained from the open-ended question were systematically coded and analysed using a thematic approach to identify, themes and insights. The data analysis for the Customer Satisfaction Survey was conducted using SPSS (Statistical Package for the Social Sciences), a robust statistical software widely used for data analysis. The collected survey responses were imported into SPSS for examination, analysis, and interpretation to support meaningful conclusions. Descriptive statistics, including mean scores and frequency distributions, were employed to summarise the data, providing an overview of respondents’ satisfaction levels and the distribution of responses across various variables. Using SPSS, the library was able to generate valuable insights into customer satisfaction, identify key strengths and areas for improvement, and support evidence-based decision-making to enhance the overall library experience for its users.
7 Reporting The survey findings were compiled and presented in a comprehensive report, highlighting key insights, emerging trends, and practical recommendations. This report served as an important reference for library management in identifying areas of strength as well as aspects requiring improvement, thereby supporting evidence-based decision-making and strategic planning. By utilising a structured questionnaire as the primary data collection instrument and applying systematic random sampling through RAOSOFT, the 2025 Library Customer Satisfaction Survey ensured a systematic and representative evaluation of customer satisfaction levels. This approach enabled the collection of meaningful feedback and valuable insights, ultimately guiding continuous efforts to enhance library services and address the evolving needs of its users. Balanced Scorecard Target Commencing in 2025, the target mean score for all five survey categories was revised upward from 3.50 to 4.00 as part of the Library's continuous commitment to service excellence and customer satisfaction. This benchmark was established to ensure that customer satisfaction levels consistently exceeded the “Somewhat Satisfied” and “Satisfied” thresholds. By aiming for this target, the library demonstrated its commitment to continuous improvement and to surpassing user expectations, thereby delivering a high standard of service across all areas. RESULT Demographic result The 2025 Customer Satisfaction Survey was conducted to assess the level of satisfaction among library clients across five key categories: information resources, services, facilities and equipment, library staff, and communication and promotion. A total of 427 respondents participated in the survey, exceeding the target of 378 respondents. Table 2: Number of respondents according to Categories and Status Categories Full-time Part-Time Contract Total % Academic staff 24 3 7 34 7.96 Administrative staff 29 4 2 35 8.2 Postgraduate students 89 12 0 101 23.65 Undergraduate students 251 3 0 254 59.49 Foundation students 3 0 0 3 0.7 TOTAL 396 22 9 427 100 According to Table 2, the largest participation of respondents comprised undergraduate students, with 254 individuals (59.49%), indicating a high level of engagement and interest in the library. In contrast, academic staff represented the smallest group, with only 34 respondents (7.96%), reflecting relatively lower participation in the survey.
8 Figure 1: Number of respondents based on K/C/D/I/O The highest number of respondents were 17.33% (n=74) of the total, from the Kulliyyah of Economics and Management Sciences (KENMS). Meanwhile, the smallest respondent was from Kulliyyah of Medicine (KOM), with only one respondent, as shown in Figure 1. Gender Figure 2: Number of respondents based on Gender The gender distribution indicated that most respondents were female, comprising 63.2% (n=270), while 36.8% (n=157) were male. This suggests a slightly higher engagement among female participants in the survey. 74 65 61 55 43 41 34 19 11 10 7 4 2 1 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 NUMBER OF RESPONDENTS BASED ON K/C/D/I/O 270 157 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 FEMALE MALE NUMBER OF RESPONDENT BASED ON GENDER
9 Nationality Figure 3: Number of respondents based on Nationality Out of 427 respondents, the majority were Malaysian with a total of 371 respondents (86.9%), while 56 respondents (13.1%) were International as illustrated in Figure 3. This indicated that the survey had significantly more participation received from local respondents. Level of satisfaction This section examined the outcomes regarding the mean score for five categories; i) Information Resources, ii) Library Services, iii) Facilities and Equipment, iv) Library Staff, and v) Communication and Promotion. Information resources This category focused on assessing the quality, availability, and accessibility of the library's information resources, such as books, journals, databases, and digital collections. It explores the satisfaction levels regarding the range, relevance, and ease of access to these resources. There are five sub-categories for Information Resources, which are: i. Q1- Required and recommended references as listed in the Course Outlines meet my learning and research needs. ii. Q2- Printed resources (e.g. books, journals, staff etc.) meet my learning and research needs. iii. Q3- Online resources (e.g. online databases, e-books, e-thesis, e-journals etc.) meet my learning and research needs. iv. Q4- The information resources are current and relevant. 371 56 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 MALAYSIAN INTERNATIONAL NATIONALITY OF THE RESPONDENTS
10 Figure 4: A means score for sub-categories of Information Resources Table 3: A means score for sub-categories of Information Resources Respondents Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Means Academic staff 4.24 4.24 4.24 4.29 4.25 Administrative staff 4.17 4.20 4.23 4.17 4.19 Postgraduate students 4.17 4.17 4.28 4.14 4.19 Undergraduate students 4.23 4.23 4.25 4.25 4.24 Foundation students 4.00 3.67 4.00 4.00 3.92 Figure 4 and Table 3 showed the statistical analysis of the library customer satisfaction survey for Information Resources indicated an overall high level of satisfaction across respondent groups, with mean scores ranging from 3.92 to 4.25, all exceeding the acceptable benchmark of 4.00. Academic staff recorded the highest overall mean (4.25) and the highest satisfaction in Q4 (4.29), followed closely by undergraduate students with overall mean of 4.24, and with high means score also for Q3 and Q4 (4.25). Administrative staff and postgraduate students demonstrated consistent perceptions, each with a mean score of 4.19, and both the level of satisfaction in Q3 with 4.28 and 4.23. This showed the online resources meet my learning and research needs. In contrast, foundation students reported the lowest mean score (3.92), showing possible gap in printed resources Q2 (3.67). Overall, the findings suggested that the library effectively meets user expectations, while highlighting the need for targeted improvements to better support foundation students’ level especially in providing printed resources to meet their learning and research needs. 4.24 4.17 4.17 4.23 4.00 4.24 4.20 4.17 4.23 3.67 4.24 4.23 4.28 4.25 4.00 4.29 4.17 4.14 4.25 4.00 3.30 3.40 3.50 3.60 3.70 3.80 3.90 4.00 4.10 4.20 4.30 4.40 Academic staff Administrative staff Postgraduate students Undergraduate students Foundation students A MEANS SCORE FOR SUB-CATEGORIES OF INFORMATION RESOURCES Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4
11 Figure 5 Overall Means Score for Sub-categories mean score for Information Resources 2022-2025 Figure 5 presented the mean satisfaction scores for four aspects of information resources over four years. In 2022, the result indicated satisfaction level is considering high across all four areas, with Q1 received the highest mean score at 4.21 same as in year 2024 with 4.21 high mean score. Then, followed by Q2 (4.15), Q3 (4.16), and Q4 (4.10). These results reflected strong confidence in the adequacy and quality of both printed and online resources, as well as on relevancy and accuracy of the resources met to their learning and research needs. Meanwhile, in 2023, satisfaction declined across all areas, with Q1 dropped to 4.05, Q2 to 3.97, Q3 to 3.94, and Q4 to 4.01. This downward trend suggested growing concerns among users regarding the availability and relevance of required materials, particularly in printed and online resource categories. Users expressed high satisfaction across all four areas in year 2024, with Q1 on required and recommended references received the highest mean score at 4.21, followed by Q3 (4.19), Q2 (4.18), and Q4 (4.18). These results reflect strong confidence in the adequacy and quality of both printed and online resources, as well as on relevancy and accuracy of the resources met to their learning and research needs. In 2025, satisfaction declined slightly across most categories, except for Q3, which increased slightly to 4.20. Q1 fell to 4.16, Q2 to 4.10, and Q4 to 4.17. This trend highlighted the need to strengthen library resources, particularly in required and recommended references, printed materials, and the accuracy and relevance of resources to better meet user needs. In summary, satisfaction with information resources fluctuated between 2022 and 2025, with notable declines in 2023 and 2025 but strong rebounds in 2024. The results emphasized the importance of continuously enhancing printed and online resources to maintain user confidence in their adequacy, relevance, and accuracy. Library services 4.21 4.15 4.16 4.10 4.05 3.97 3.94 4.01 4.21 4.18 4.19 4.18 4.16 4.10 4.20 4.17 3.8 3.85 3.9 3.95 4 4.05 4.1 4.15 4.2 4.25 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 OVERALL MEANS SCORE FOR SUB-CATEGORIES OF INFORMATION RESOURCES 2022-2025 2022 2023 2024 2025
12 This category evaluated the library's services consist of four sub-categories for Library Services, which are: i. Q1- Library Online Catalogue (OPAC) ii. Q2- Library skills classes iii. Q3- Library counters services iv. Q4- Reference or research inquiries The aims are to measure satisfaction with the efficiency, effectiveness, and helpfulness of the services provided by the library staff. Figure 6 A means scores for sub-categories of Library Services Table 4: A means score for sub-categories of Library Services Respondents Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Means Academic Staff 4.41 4.32 4.44 4.35 4.38 Administrative Staff 4.23 4.34 4.31 4.29 4.29 Postgraduate Students 4.24 4.24 4.35 4.23 4.26 Undergraduate Students 4.20 4.23 4.33 4.28 4.26 Foundation Students 3.67 4.00 4.33 3.67 3.92 Figure 6 and Table 4 showed that academic staff reported the highest satisfaction with library services, recording an overall mean score of 4.38. Within this group, Q3 achieved the highest mean score at 4.44, reflecting strong satisfaction of library counter services. Administrative staff followed closely, with an overall mean of 4.29. Postgraduate and undergraduate students both reported mean scores of 4.26, with Q3 again standing out at 4.35 and 4.33 respectively, 4.41 4.23 4.24 4.20 3.67 4.32 4.34 4.24 4.23 4.00 4.44 4.31 4.35 4.33 4.33 4.35 4.29 4.23 4.28 3.67 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.50 5.00 Academic staff Administrative staff Postgraduate students Undergraduate students Foundation students A MEANS SCORE FOR SUB-CATEGORIES OF LIBRARY SERVICES Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4
13 highlighting satisfaction with counter services. Foundation students expressed comparatively lower satisfaction, with an overall mean of 3.92, though their Q3 score of 4.33 indicated similar appreciation for library counter services. The library should continue to strengthen counter services while focusing on areas with lower satisfaction, particularly among foundation students. Targeted improvements in the Online Public Access Catalogue (OPAC) and in reference or research inquiry support is become essential to raising overall satisfaction levels. Figure 7 Overall mean score for Sub-categories means score for Library Services In 2024, satisfaction levels were consistently high, with Q1 (4.29), Q2 (4.30), Q3 (4.38), and Q4 (4.31). Furthermore, Q3 recorded the highest means score with 4.38, reflecting strong approval of library counter services. Subsequently, satisfaction declined slightly across most areas in year 2025, with Q1 (4.15), Q2 (4.23), Q3 (4.35), and Q4 (4.16). The lowest mean score was observed in Q1 (4.15), indicating reduced satisfaction with the library’s Online Public Access Catalogue (OPAC). However, it is important to note that the number of Foundation respondents was limited to only three participants, and therefore, these results should be interpreted with caution as they may not fully represent the overall views of this user group. In summary, satisfaction with library services was consistently increase in year 2024 nevertheless slightly declined in year 2025. The result showed the library are required to improve the services in the following aspects; in other aspects; Q1 (Library Online Catalogue (OPAC)) and Q4 (Reference or research inquiries) Facilities and equipment This category assesses the physical facilities and equipment available within the library. The category consists of reading area, study rooms, computer lab, printing, and photocopying facilities, and WIFI access. It aims to gauge satisfaction with the comfort, convenience, and functionality of these resources. There are five sub-categories for Facilities and Equipment as follows: i. Q1- Reading area ii. Q2- Study rooms (Discussion/Carrel/Research rooms, etc.) 4.29 4.30 4.38 4.31 4.15 4.23 4.35 4.16 4 4.05 4.1 4.15 4.2 4.25 4.3 4.35 4.4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 OVERALL MEAN SCORE FOR SUB-CATEGORIES OF LIBRARY SERVICES 2024 2025
14 iii. Q3- Computer Lab iv. Q4- WIFI access Figure 8 A Means Scores for Sub-Categories of Facilities & Equipment Table 5: A Means Scores for Sub-Categories of Facilities & Equipment Respondent Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Means Academic Staff 4.50 4.38 4.32 4.38 4.40 Administrative Staff 4.11 4.17 4.20 3.97 4.11 Postgraduate Students 4.11 4.14 4.07 3.96 4.07 Undergraduate Students 4.28 4.23 4.23 4.07 4.20 Foundation Students 4.67 5.00 4.00 3.00 4.17 Figure 8 and Table 5 presented the mean satisfaction scores for library facilities and equipment across user groups. Academic staff reported the highest overall satisfaction with a mean score of 4.40, with Q1 (reading areas) achieving the strongest rating at 4.50. Undergraduate students (4.20) and foundation students (4.17) followed, both recording their highest satisfaction in Q1, with mean scores of 4.28 and 4.67 respectively. Administrative staff reported an overall mean of 4.11, while postgraduate students recorded the lowest satisfaction at 4.07. For Q2 (study rooms) and Q3 (computer labs), satisfaction remained consistently strong across all groups, with scores ranging from 4.00 to 5.00, indicating that these facilities generally meet study and research needs. However, Q4 (Wi-Fi access) in 2025 showed a slight decline, with administrative staff (3.97), postgraduate students (3.96), and foundation students (3.00) reporting the lowest ratings. This highlights the need to improve internet connectivity to better support teaching, learning, and research activities. Overall, satisfaction with library facilities and equipment consistently remained high across all 4.50 4.11 4.11 4.28 4.67 4.38 4.17 4.14 4.23 5.00 4.32 4.20 4.07 4.23 4.00 4.38 3.97 3.96 4.07 3.00 0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 Academic staff Administrative staff Postgraduate students Undergraduate students Foundation students A MEANS SCORE FOR SUB-CATEGORIES OF FACILITIES & EQUIPMENT Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4
15 user groups. Additionally, the finding indicated the prompt action need to be taken for improvement of internet connectivity to support academic activities. Figure 9 Overall mean score for Sub-Categories of Facilities & Equipment Figure 9 presented the overall mean scores for the sub-categories of Facilities and Equipment from 2022 to 2025. Over this four-year period, Q2 (study rooms: discussion, carrel, and research rooms) consistently recorded high satisfaction levels, demonstrating a steady upward trend from 4.19 in 2022 to 4.29 in 2023, 4.35 in 2024, and 4.38 in 2025. This pattern reflects continuous improvements undertaken by the library in meeting user expectations for study room facilities. Q1 (reading area) experienced a slight decline from 4.32 in 2022 to 4.30 in 2023, followed by an increase to 4.40 in 2024, indicating successful enhancement efforts. However, the score marginally decreased again to 4.33 in 2025. Meanwhile, Q3 (computer lab) remained stable at 4.04 between 2022 and 2023, before rising significantly to 4.30 in 2024, and subsequently declining slightly to 4.16 in 2025. This trend suggested that while improvements have been made, further attention is required to enhance the quality and performance of PCs in the computer labs. For Q4 (WiFi access), satisfaction levels fluctuated over the years, with mean scores of 3.80 in 2022, increasing to 4.02 in 2023, declining sharply to 3.27 in 2024, and recovering to 3.88 in 2025. Despite the improvement in 2025, the score has yet to return to its peak in 2023. This indicateed that immediate and targeted action is necessary to improve WiFi accessibility and reliability for users. In summary, study rooms (Q2) showed consistent improvement and remained the highest- performing facility, while reading areas (Q1) and computer labs (Q3) demonstrated moderate fluctuations despite periodic enhancements. In contrast, WiFi access (Q4) exhibited unstable performance and remains a critical area requiring urgent improvement to meet user expectations. Library staff This category focuses on the interactions and assistance provided by the library staff. It examines respondents' satisfaction with the knowledge, professionalism, and responsiveness of the library 4.32 4.19 4.04 3.80 4.30 4.29 4.04 4.02 4.40 4.35 4.30 3.27 4.33 4.38 4.16 3.88 0 1 2 3 4 5 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 OVERALL MEANS SCORE FOR SUB-CATEGORIES OF FACILITIES & EQUIPMENT 2022-2025 2022 2023 2024 2025
16 staff members in addressing inquiries, giving guidance, and supporting clients in their information needs. The sub-categories for Library Staff are as follows: i. Q1- Library staff are professional, approachable, and friendly. ii. Q2- Library staff provide accurate answers to my inquiries. iii. Q3- Library staff are willing to assist and provide helpful information. Figure 10 A means scores for sub-categories of Library Staff Table 6: A means scores for sub-categories of Library Staff Respondents Q1 Q2 Q3 means Academic staff 4.59 4.56 4.44 4.53 Administrative staff 4.40 4.43 4.43 4.42 Postgraduate student 4.39 4.43 4.48 4.43 Undergraduate student 4.38 4.37 4.39 4.38 Foundation students 4.33 4.67 4.67 4.56 The survey findings on library staff indicated a high level of satisfaction across all five user groups, as illustrated in Figure 10 and Table 6. Foundation students recorded the highest mean satisfaction score of 4.56, with items Q2 and Q3 each achieving a mean of 4.67, reflecting a strong level of satisfaction with the staff’s professionalism, approachability, friendliness, and the accuracy of responses to user inquiries. However, it is important to note that the number of Foundation respondents was limited to only three participants, and therefore, these results should be interpreted with caution as they may not fully represent the overall views of this user group. Academic staff also demonstrated high satisfaction, with an average score of 4.53, particularly appreciating the professional, approachable, and friendly manner of library staff (Q1: 4.59), as well as the accuracy of answers received (Q2: 4.56). Postgraduate students and administrative staff likewise reported strong satisfaction, with overall mean scores of 4.43 and 4.42 respectively, followed by undergraduate students with an average score of 4.38. 4.59 4.40 4.39 4.38 4.33 4.56 4.43 4.43 4.37 4.67 4.44 4.43 4.48 4.39 4.67 4.10 4.20 4.30 4.40 4.50 4.60 4.70 Academic staff Administrative staff Postgraduate students Undergraduate students Foundation students A MEANS SCORE FOR SUB-CATEGORIES OF LIBRARY STAFF Q1 Q2 Q3
17 In summary, all user groups reported high satisfaction with library staff, particularly in terms of professionalism, friendliness, and accuracy of responses. Foundation and academic staff recorded the highest satisfaction levels, while postgraduate students, administrative, and undergraduate students also demonstrated consistently strong positive perceptions. Figure 11 Overall means scores for sub-categories of Library Staff The overall mean scores for the sub-categories evaluating library staff from 2022 to 2025 indicated in Figure 11, a consistently increasing trend in user satisfaction. In Q1, the score improved from 4.34 in 2022 to 4.42 in 2023 and was consistently maintained through to 2025. Moreover, Q2 showed an increase from 4.31 in 2022 to 4.43 in 2023, followed by a slight dip to 4.42 in 2024, before rising strongly to a mean score of 4.49 in 2025. This indicated that users experienced a high level of satisfaction with the accuracy of staff responses to their inquiries. Similarly, Q3 demonstrated a positive upward trend in satisfaction levels, increasing from 4.33 in 2022 to 4.45 in 2023. The means score declined slightly in 2024 to 4.44, before increasing again to 4.48 in 2025. This indicating the users were satisfied with Library staff on their willingness providing useful information needed. In summary, user satisfaction with library staff showed a consistent upward trend from 2022 to 2025, with minor fluctuations in certain years. The highest improvements were observed in the accuracy of staff responses and overall service quality, reflecting strong and sustained positive user perceptions. Communication and promotion This category evaluated the effectiveness of communication channels and strategies employed by the library. It assesses satisfaction with the clarity, informativeness, and timeliness of communication related to library services, updates, events, and promotions. This included feedback on the accessibility of information through the library's website, social media platforms, and other communication channels. There are four sub-categories for Communication and Promotion which are: i. Q1- Signages are clear and appropriate. 4.34 4.31 4.33 4.42 4.43 4.45 4.42 4.42 4.44 4.42 4.49 4.48 4.2 4.25 4.3 4.35 4.4 4.45 4.5 4.55 Q1 Q2 Q3 OVERALL MEANS SCORES FOR SUB-CATEGORIES OF LIBRARY STAFF 2022-2025 2022 2023 2024 2025
18 ii. Q2- Library websites and social media are informative and interactive. iii. Q3- Updates on Library services, facilities, and activities are prompt. iv. Q4- Library exhibitions are enlightening and interesting. Figure 12 A means scores for sub-categories of Communication & Promotion Table 7: A Means Score for Sub-Categories of Communication & Promotion Respondents Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Means Academic Staff 4.38 4.41 4.38 4.38 4.39 Administrative Staff 4.17 4.31 4.26 4.29 4.26 Postgraduate Students 4.18 4.16 4.12 4.17 4.16 Undergraduate Students 4.22 4.28 4.28 4.28 4.26 Foundation students 4.33 4.00 4.33 4.33 4.25 The results indicated generally positive feedback across all user groups of respondents, with academic staff recorded the highest mean score of 4.39 and the highest satisfaction observed in Q2 (4.41). This indicated that academic staff are satisfied with the library website and social media. This was followed by administrative staff and undergraduate students, both recording similar mean scores of 4.26. Moreover, Q2, Q3, and Q4 for undergraduate students received similarly high mean scores of 4.28, while Q2 for administrative staff recorded a mean of 4.31. This showed the library website and social media, library services, facilities, activity updates, and exhibitions met users’ satisfaction. Foundation students recorded a slightly lower mean score of 4.25, with satisfaction levels of 4.33 for Q1 (Appropriate signages), Q3 (Library services, facilities, and activities were updated), and Q4 (Library exhibitions interesting exhibited). Postgraduate students recorded the lowest mean score of 4.16, although Q1, Q2, Q3, and Q4 remained consistently satisfactory. 4.38 4.17 4.18 4.22 4.33 4.41 4.31 4.16 4.28 4.00 4.38 4.26 4.12 4.28 4.33 4.38 4.29 4.17 4.28 4.33 3.70 3.80 3.90 4.00 4.10 4.20 4.30 4.40 4.50 Academic staff Administrative staff Postgraduate students Undergraduate students Foundation students A MEANS SCORE FOR SUB-CATEGORIES OF COMMUNICATION & PROMOTION Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4
19 Overall, all user groups expressed positive satisfaction with the library’s website, social media, services, facilities, and activities, with academic staff reporting the highest satisfaction levels. While foundation and postgraduate students recorded slightly lower mean scores, satisfaction remained consistently strong across all evaluated aspects and groups. Figure 13 Overall means scores for sub-categories of Communication & Promotion Figure 13 illustrated the overall mean scores for the sub-categories of communication and promotion from 2022 to 2025, showing a generally steady and encouraging improvement. For Q1, satisfaction slightly declined from 4.22 in 2022 to 4.18 in 2023, before increasing significantly to 4.30 in 2024 and moderating to 4.26 in 2025. This fluctuation indicated some inconsistency in user satisfaction and highlights the need for the library to further enhance communication and promotional efforts, particularly in providing clear signage. For Q2, the mean score increased gradually from 4.17 in 2022 to 4.19 in 2023, followed by a notable rise to 4.31 in 2024, before declining to 4.23 in 2025. This trend suggested varying levels of user satisfaction with promotional information disseminated through the library website and social media platforms. In Q3, the mean score improved from 4.14 in 2022 to 4.31 in both 2023 and 2024, before slightly decreasing to 4.27 in 2025, indicating a generally positive trend with a minor recent decline. Q4 recorded the highest satisfaction levels across all sub-categories, increasing from 4.24 in 2022 to 4.38 in 2024, before slightly decreasing to 4.29 in 2025. This suggested that while library exhibitions were well received, there may be a need to enhance their interactivity and appeal to sustain user interest. In conclusion, communication and promotion showed positive but fluctuating satisfaction trends from 2022 to 2025, indicating general improvement alongside a need for more consistent enhancement, particularly in signage clarity, digital promotion, and exhibition engagement. 4.22 4.17 4.14 4.24 4.18 4.19 4.31 4.23 4.30 4.31 4.31 4.38 4.26 4.23 4.27 4.29 4 4.05 4.1 4.15 4.2 4.25 4.3 4.35 4.4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 OVERALL MEANS SCORE FOR SUB-CATEGORIES OF COMMUNICATION & PROMOTION 2022-2025 2022 2023 2024 2025
20 Overall satisfaction In this survey, the respondents were also asked about their overall satisfaction with the library. Figure 14 below shows the results of a means score for their overall satisfaction. Figure 14 A Means Score for Overall Satisfaction Level The overall satisfaction ratings with the library from 2022 to 2025 demonstrated a fluctuating yet generally positive trend across all user groups. Academic staff experienced a decline from 4.31 (2022) to 3.86 (2024), followed by a notable improvement to 4.39 in 2025, suggesting the effectiveness of recent service enhancement strategies. A similar pattern was observed among administrative staff, where satisfaction decreased from 4.42 (2022) to 4.03 (2024) before recovering to 4.25 in 2025, indicating improved service responsiveness. Postgraduate students showed a slight decrease from 4.18 (2022) to 4.06 (2023), with stability in 2024 and a moderate increase to 4.22 in 2025, reflecting consistent support for their academic needs. Undergraduate students exhibited a gradual decline from 4.16 (2022) to 4.00 (2024), followed by a marked increase to 4.27 in 2025. Overall, all four user groups recorded improved satisfaction levels in 2025, indicating a successful enhancement in library services and user engagement. The library should continue strengthening targeted improvement strategies introduced in 2025 while implementing regular feedback mechanisms to sustain satisfaction across all user groups. Additionally, focused engagement initiatives for academic and administrative staff are recommended to prevent future declines and ensure consistent service quality. 4.31 4.42 4.18 4.16 4.20 4.17 4.06 4.04 3.86 4.03 4.06 4.0 4.39 4.25 4.22 4.27 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 3.9 4 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 Academic staff Administrative staff Postgraduate students Undergraduate students A MEANS SCORE FOR OVERALL SATISFACTION LEVEL 2022-2025 2022 2023 2024 2025
21 Figure 15 Overall Score means for five categories Furthermore, Figure 15 provided an overview of the overall mean scores for the five categories of satisfaction across the four years from 2022 to 2025. The finding indicated that information resources has shown a slight decline over the observed period, decreasing from a mean score of 4.14 in 2022 to 3.99 in 2023 and 2024. However, the score improved to 4.16 in 2025, indicating a renewed positive perception among users. Overall, the results suggested that users are satisfied with the accessibility and currency of the library’s information resources, and that recent improvements in collection development strategies have effectively aligned with user expectations. Secondly, satisfaction with library services and facilities remained generally stable over the period, with only minor fluctuations before improving in 2025. Library service satisfaction decreased slightly from 4.19 in 2022 to 4.10 in 2023, remained stable at 4.11 in 2024, and increased to 4.22 in 2025. Similarly, satisfaction with facilities and equipment showed marginal variation, recording 4.09 in 2022, 4.12 in 2023, and 4.07 in 2024, before rising to 4.19 in 2025. These findings indicate that while user perceptions have been consistently positive, the improvements observed in 2025 suggest that ongoing enhancements and responsive maintenance efforts have been effective. To sustain and further improve satisfaction, the library should continue strengthening maintenance systems and service quality while proactively addressing user feedback to ensure consistent performance. Thirdly, library staff continued to receive the highest satisfaction ratings, despite a slight decline from 4.32 in 2022 to 4.21 in 2024, before increasing significantly to 4.46 in 2025. This indicated that users consistently value the professionalism, friendliness, and helpfulness of library staff, and that recent efforts have further strengthened service delivery. Similarly, satisfaction with communication and promotional activities showed a gradual decrease from 4.19 in 2022 to 4.12 in 2024, followed by an improvement to 4.26 in 2025, suggesting that enhanced visibility, timely updates, and engaging outreach initiatives have positively influenced user perception. To sustain these improvements, the library should continue investing in staff training and actively strengthen 4.14 4.19 4.09 4.32 4.19 3.99 4.1 4.12 4.29 4.15 3.99 4.11 4.07 4.21 4.12 4.16 4.22 4.19 4.46 4.26 3.7 3.8 3.9 4 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 Information Resources Library Services Facilities & Equipment Library Staff Communication & Promotion OVERALL SCORE MEANS FOR FIVE CATEGORIES 2022 - 2025 2022 2023 2024 2025
22 communication strategies, particularly through consistent engagement and effective promotional channels. Overall, the findings demonstrated that the library has maintained consistently high user satisfaction across all five service categories, despite minor declines between 2022 and 2024. In 2025 indicated that recent enhancements and strategic initiatives have been effective, particularly in strengthening service delivery, staff performance, and user engagement. Library staff remained the strongest contributor to satisfaction, while gains in communication, facilities, and information resources reflect successful responsiveness to user needs. This represented a strong achievement, and to sustain these results, the library should continue focusing on continuous improvement, proactive feedback mechanisms, staff development, and regular review of services and resources. Frequency and Purposes of Library Visits The survey also examined the frequency and purposes of respondents’ visits to the library. The purpose is to gain insights into how often clients utilise library services and the factors that motivate their visits. Furthermore, identifying the purposes and frequency of the visits offers deeper insights into the diverse needs and interests of library users. These purposes include conducting research, borrowing materials, attending events or programs, accessing resources, seeking assistance from staff, or using the library as a quiet space for study or leisure. The detailed findings are presented in the following section. Figure 16 Frequency of Library Visit Figure 16 presented the frequency of library visits among clients in 2025. Undergraduate students recorded the highest level of library usage, with the majority visiting weekly (96 respondents), followed by daily (85 respondents) and monthly (62 respondents), while 11 respondents reported visiting once per semester. Postgraduate students also demonstrated a high level of utilisation, with 42 visiting weekly, 37 daily, and 20 monthly; only 2 respondents visited once per semester, and none reported never visiting the library. 1 10 15 810 5 14 6 37 42 20 2 85 96 62 11 0 1 1 1 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 Daily Weekly Monthly Once persem FREQUENCY OF LIBRARY VISIT Academic staff Administrative staff Postgraduate Students Undergraduate students Foundation students
23 Administrative staff exhibited moderated usage patterns, with 10 visiting daily, 5 weekly, 14 monthly, and 6 once per semester. In contrast, academic staff showed comparatively lower levels of engagement, with only 1 reporting daily visits, 10 visiting weekly, 15 monthly, and 8 once per semester. Meanwhile, foundation students demonstrated minimal library usage, with only 1 respondent each reporting daily, weekly, and monthly visits. Overall, none of the respondents indicated that they never visited the library, reflecting strong engagement with library services. Overall, frequency of library visit in 2025 was the highest among undergraduate and postgraduate students, moderate among administrative staff, lower among academic staff, and minimal among foundation students, which suggested to increase further engagement with several active programs. Purposes of a library visit In this survey, respondents were asked about the purpose of their visit to the library. There are six purposes provided in this survey, and respondents may select more than one answer. Figure 17 Purposes of Library Visit The findings in figure 17 provided the purposes of library visits by the respondents indicated that academic-related activities particularly completing assignments and borrowing or returning books were the primary reasons clients visit the library. Undergraduate students represented the largest group of users, with 150 respondents visiting for classes and to use library facilities. Additionally, 140 respondents visited for socialising purposes, 95 for assignments or research, 79 for borrowing or returning books, and 55 for attending events or programmes. Postgraduate students demonstrated a slightly different pattern, with 61 respondents indicating socialising and use of library facilities as their main reason for visiting, followed by attending classes (51 respondents), assignments or research (28 respondents), borrowing or returning books (25 respondents), and attending events or programmes (20 respondents). Notably, both academic and administrative staff primarily visited the library for socialising and 6 21 8 15 4 85 21 3 12 8 12 51 61 25 20 28 61 150 140 79 55 95 150 1 1 2 0 1 3 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 Classes Socializing Borrowing / Returning books Events / Programmes Assignment / Research Using library facilities PURPOSE OF LIBRARY VISIT Academic staff Administrative staff Postgraduate students Undergraduate students Foundation students
24 meeting colleagues, with 21 respondents indicating this purpose. Overall, library visits are largely driven by academic needs among students, while social interaction and use of facilities also play a significant role, particularly among postgraduate students and staff. Figure 18 Overall Purposes of Library Visit Figure 18 presented the overall distribution of library visit purposes among users. The findings indicated that the most reason for visiting the library was for socialising activities, with a total of 244 recorded visits. This was followed by using library facilities (234 visits) and attending classes, which ranked third with 213 visits. Additionally, 136 respondents visited the library for assignments or research purposes, while 117 visits were attributed to borrowing and returning books. Finally, 102 visits indicated that they visited the library to attend events or programmes. In summary, the findings indicated that the library is primarily utilised as a social and collaborative environment, extending beyond its traditional academic role. The high level of facility usage highlights the importance of well-equipped physical spaces in attracting users. While academic purposes; attending classes, completing assignments, and conducting research remain relevant, they are not the main drivers of visits. Additionally, traditional services like book borrowing are comparatively less prominent, whereas events and programmes, although valuable, serve a more specialised segment of users. 244 234 213 136 117 102 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 Socializing Using library facilities Classes Assignment / Research Borrowing / Returning books Events / Programmes OVERALL PURPOSES OF LIBRARY VISIT
25 IMPROVEMENT The final open-ended question let respondents share suggestions for improvement. Their responses were reviewed and analysed to find common ideas and issues. As a result, five main themes were identified, matching the survey’s key categories. Table 8: Open-ended answers for Improvement from respondents THEMES IMPROVEMENT INFORMATION RESOURCES 6 LIBRARY SERVICES 14 FACILITIES & EQUIPMENT 32 LIBRARY STAFF 4 COMMUNICATION & PROMOTION 3 TOTAL 59 Table 8 presented the thematic analysis of open-ended responses from the Survey, highlighting key areas where users proposed improvements. A total of 59 comments were categorised into five primary themes aligned with the survey’s core service areas. The most frequently cited theme was Facilities & Equipment, accounting for 32 responses. This indicated a high user concern regarding the adequacy and quality of the library’s physical environment, including study spaces, Musolla, air-conditioning, seating, PCs provided in computers labs, Wi-Fi access, signage, power outlets, air ventilation in controlling the ai circulation due to the dust and fungal growth. These findings highlighted not just availability, but quality, comfort, and functionality (e.g., temperature control, ergonomic seating, stable Wi-Fi), indicating rising standards among users. Library Services received 14 responses, indicating that respondents are keen to see improvements in the efficiency, accessibility, or responsiveness of services; upgrade services that meet the user’s needs and expectation, offering more library skills class, borrowing, returning, reference, and upgrading library website. Information Resources was identified in 6 responses, indicating a continued demand for more relevant, diverse, and up-to-date collections. Feedback encompasses both physical and digital materials, including printed books, e-books, and online databases. This highlights the importance of sustaining a dynamic and responsive collection development strategy to meet evolving user needs and academic requirements. Library Staff, which achieved high mean scores in the quantitative assessment, received 4 positive comments in the open-ended responses. This indicated that overall user perceptions of staff service are favourable; however, a small number of comments suggest the presence of isolated negative experiences that may require attention. Communication & Promotion recorded the lowest number of comments, with only 3 responses. The feedback primarily focused on improving the library website and enhancing clarity in signage, indicating specific areas where communication effectiveness can be strengthened. This finding indicating that an effective signage should be clear, consistent, and user-centred, enabling users to navigate the library independently while reducing
26 confusion and reliance on staff assistance. In short, the feedback shows that users want better facilities and improvements to main services. These findings support the survey results and can help guide future improvements. FINDING The overall customer satisfaction findings for 2025 indicate a favourable perception of library services across all key areas. Among the five categories assessed, Library Staff achieved the highest satisfaction score of 4.46, reflecting strong appreciation for staff professionalism, support, and overall service quality. Communication and Promotion ranked second with a score of 4.26, indicating the effectiveness of efforts in keeping users well-informed about library services, programmes, and available resources. Library Services also recorded a high level of satisfaction at 4.22, suggesting that the core services provided successfully meet user needs and expectations. Satisfaction with Facilities and Equipment was slightly lower at 4.19, implying that while users are generally satisfied, there remain opportunities for further enhancement. Information Resources received the lowest score among the categories at 4.16, highlighting a potential area for improvement, particularly in terms of accessibility, diversity, and relevance of library materials. Overall, the findings indicate that clients were generally satisfied with the library’s services and resources, with appreciation for the support provided by library staff and the effectiveness of communication efforts. Furthermore, the results exceeded the established benchmark mean score of 4.00 for 2025, reflecting a positive level of user satisfaction. Continued enhancements in information resources and facilities are expected to further improve user satisfaction in the years ahead. Means Score 2012-2025 Initially, the target mean score for the Library Customer Satisfaction Survey was set at 3.00 on a 4-point Likert scale. In 2018, the Library Management revised the target and adopted a 5-point Likert scale, with the target mean score increased to 3.50. Effective from 2025, the target mean score was further raised to 4.00 and will remain in effect until otherwise directed by the Library Management.
27 Figure 19 Overall Means 2012-2025 The customer satisfaction data from 2012 to 2025 indicated a clear upward trend in overall satisfaction levels over time. In the earlier years (2012–2016), satisfaction remained relatively low and stable, with mean scores around 3.11 to 3.14, reflecting moderate user satisfaction. A significant improvement is observed from 2018 onwards, where the score increased to 3.96 and continued to strengthen, reaching above 4.00 by 2020 and maintaining this higher performance through 2025. This shift suggested that the library has progressively enhanced its services, leading to stronger user perception and satisfaction in recent years. Despite minor fluctuations between 2019 and 2024, where scores varied slightly, the overall pattern remains positive, culminating in the highest recorded score of 4.26 in 2025. This indicated that recent strategies and service improvements have been effective in achieving high satisfaction levels. Overall, the long-term trend reflects a successful transformation from moderate to high satisfaction, demonstrating the library’s continuous commitment to improving quality, responsiveness, and user-centered services. Means Score for five categories 2012-2025 Table 9 presented the mean scores for the five satisfaction categories from 2012 to 2025, providing a comprehensive overview of user perceptions across key aspects of the library. The results indicated a fluctuating trend in all five categories between 2020 and 2025, with both periods of decline and subsequent improvement observed. Table 9: Means Score for five categories 2012-2025 The finding indicated a substantial upward trend in satisfaction across all five categories over the 3.11 3.13 3.14 3.96 3.89 4.06 4.19 4.13 4.10 4.26 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 2012 2014 2016 2018 2019 2020 2022 2023 2024 2025 OVERALL MEANS SCORE 2012-2025 Categories 2012 2014 2016 2018 2019 2020 2022 2023 2024 2025 Information Resources 3.03 3.13 3.14 4.00 3.87 3.97 4.14 3.99 3.99 4.16 Library Services 3.14 3.19 3.31 4.16 4.08 4.11 4.19 4.10 4.11 4.22 Facilities & Equipment 3.18 3.05 3.21 4.19 3.91 4.17 4.09 4.12 4.07 4.19 Library Staff 3.12 3.20 3.34 4.26 4.22 4.26 4.32 4.29 4.21 4.46 Communication & Promotion 3.09 3.13 3.21 4.09 3.91 4.02 4.19 4.15 4.12 4.26
28 period from 2012 to 2025. In the early years (2012–2016), all categories recorded moderate satisfaction levels (means ranging approximately from 3.03 to 3.34), suggesting room for improvement. A marked increase occurred in 2018, where all categories rose sharply to around 4.00 and above, reflecting a major improvement and enhancement in overall library performance. From 2019 onwards, satisfaction levels remained consistently high (above 4.00) despite minor fluctuations, indicating that the library successfully maintained service quality and user confidence over time. Among the categories, Library Staff consistently received the highest ratings, peaking at 4.46 in 2025, highlighting strong user appreciation for staff professionalism and service quality. Conversely, Information Resources showed slightly lower and more fluctuating scores, particularly in 2023–2024 (3.99), before improving again in 2025 (4.16), suggesting the need for ongoing attention to resource development. Meanwhile, Library Services, Facilities & Equipment, and Communication & Promotion demonstrated relatively stable and positive trends, with all categories showing improvement in 2025. Overall, the findings reflect a successful transition from moderate to high satisfaction, with 2025 representing the strongest performance across all service areas, indicating effective strategic enhancements and continuous service improvement. Overall, the findings reflected a successful long-term improvement in customer satisfaction, transitioning from moderate levels in the early years to consistently high satisfaction in recent years, with 2025 representing the strongest performance across all categories. This indicated that the library’s strategic initiatives and service enhancements have been effective; therefore, the focus should be on sustaining these achievements through continuous monitoring, targeted improvements, and proactive user engagement to ensure long-term consistency and further growth in satisfaction levels. CONCLUSION The results of the Customer Satisfaction Survey 2025 indicated that the library has made substantial progress in meeting and exceeding user expectations across all service areas. Overall satisfaction scores have consistently remained above the institutional benchmark since 2020, demonstrating the effectiveness of continuous improvement efforts in service delivery, facilities enhancement, communication, and information resources. Notably, Library Staff and Communication & Promotion achieved the highest ratings, highlighting the critical role of staff professionalism and effective outreach in enhancing the overall user experience. While the findings confirm a strong level of overall satisfaction, they also point to opportunities for further improvement, particularly in sustaining the quality of Information Resources and upgrading Facilities & Equipment to better support evolving user needs. Moving forward, the library should remain committed to maintaining high service standards, strengthening continuous improvement initiatives, and aligning its strategies with changing user expectations to ensure a dynamic, accessible, and user-centred learning environment. In summary, the library should implement a systematic review of information resources and invest in updated online and print collections to ensure continued relevance and support for academic
29 needs. Additionally, the library should enhance facilities and equipment through regular maintenance, technological upgrades, and user-focused improvements to maintain a comfortable and efficient learning environment.
30 APPENDIX A SAMPLE SIZE CALCULATOR BY RAOSOFT, INC.
31 APPENDIX B CUSTOMER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2025 Congratulations on being the respondent to the survey. The Dar al-Hikmah Library, IIUM conducts this survey annually to assess the library customers’ level of satisfaction with the library services, resources, and facilities at the campus libraries. Please take a moment to complete this questionnaire. We will make sure that your participation is anonymous. Collected data will only be accessible to the library researchers conducting the survey. We appreciate your cooperation. Thank you. 1. Status: Ο Full time Ο Part-time Ο Contract basis 2. Category: Ο Academic Staff Ο Administrative Staff Ο Postgraduate Student Ο Undergraduate Student Ο Foundation Student 3. Kulliyyah/Centre/ Institute/Office: Ο AIKOL Ο KAED Ο KAHS Ο KON Ο INHART Ο AHAS KIRKHS Ο KOED Ο KICT Ο KOM Ο KOD Ο CELPAD Ο PLANETIIUM Ο KENMS Ο KOE Ο IIiBF Ο ISTAC Ο KOP Ο KOS Ο KSTCL Ο CFS Ο SASMEC Ο Others: Ο IIUM ACADEMY 4. 5. 6. Campus: Gender: Nationality: Ο Gombak Ο Male Ο Malaysian Ο Kuantan Ο Female Ο International Ο Gambang Ο Pagoh Ο Kuala Lumpur PART 2 – Please indicate how satisfied you are with the library A. INFORMATION RESOURCES To what extent are you satisfied with the following information resources: Very Dissatisfied Dissatisfied Somewhat Satisfied Satisfied Very Satisfied 1. Required and recommended references as listed in the Course Outlines meet my learning and research needs Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο 2. Printed resources (e.g. books, journals, etc.) meet my learning and research needs Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο 3. Online resources (e.g. online databases, e-books, e-thesis, e- journals etc.) meet my learning and research needs Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο 4. The information resources are current and relevant Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο B. SERVICES To what extent are you satisfied with the following services: Very Dissatisfied Dissatisfied Somewhat Satisfied Satisfied Very Satisfied 1. Library Online Catalog Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο 2. Library Skills Classes Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο 3. Library counters services Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο 4. Reference or research enquiries Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο PART 1 – Please choose your background information
32 C. FACILITIES & EQUIPMENT To what extent are you satisfied with the following facilities & equipment: Very Dissatisfied Dissatisfied Somewhat Satisfied Satisfied Very Satisfied 1. Reading area Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο 2. Study rooms (Discussion/Carrel/Research rooms, etc.) Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο 3. Computer Lab Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο 4. WIFI access Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο D. LIBRARY STAFF Satisfaction with the helpfulness/timely/friendliness/convenience of the staff in dealing with library clients. Very Dissatisfied Dissatisfied Somewhat Satisfied Satisfied Very Satisfied 1. Library staff are professional, approachable and friendly Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο 2. Library staff provide accurate answers to my enquiries Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο 3. Library staff are willing to assist and provide helpful information Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο E. COMMUNICATION AND PROMOTION Satisfaction with how information is communicated (medium/speed/language used, etc.) Very Dissatisfied Dissatisfied Somewhat Satisfied Satisfied Very Satisfied 1. Signage is clear and appropriate Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο 2. Library website and social media are informative and interactive Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο 3. Updates on Library services, facilities and activities are prompt Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο 4. Library exhibitions are enlightening and interesting Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο F. How frequently do you visit the library? Ο Daily Ο Weekly Ο Monthly Ο Once per semester Ο Never G. What are your purposes for coming to the library? (You may select more than one answer) Ο Classes Ο Socializing Ο Borrowing/returning books Ο Events/Programmes Ο Assignment/Research Ο Using library facilities (e.g. Labs, internet, rooms, etc.) H. Overall, are you satisfied with the Library? Ο Very Dissatisfied Ο Dissatisfied Ο Somewhat Satisfied Ο Satisfied Ο Very Satisfied I. Any suggestion(s) to improve the library services? ___________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________ Thank you for taking the time to complete this questionnaire. If you have any inquiries, please contact the following: Dar al-Hikmah Library Gombak: 03-64214815 Syed Muhammad Naquib al-Attas Library: 03-64211260 Dar al-Hikmah Library Kuantan: 09-5704180 Dar al-Hikmah Library Centre for Foundation Studies: 09-5183480 Pagoh Campus Library: 06-9742425
33 APPENDIX C List of open-ended answers for Improvement according to five categories. 1. Information Resources No. Comments 1. Divide the books followed by course that take the subject / course 2. Enhanced specialized collection with industry and community relevance. 3. improve database 4. If you could expand the online resources, it would be even more beneficial for postgraduate students. 5. Library seem quiet quietly lately. Maybe can encourage student searching learning material rather than reliance on technology. 6. Please enrich your data access and online resources together with latest edition of hard copy of references. 7. Reference books for course especially education and counseling are mostly outdated. perhaps can have more recent books 2. Services No Comments 1. Improve the library website. Usually it takes a long time to open the website 2. need to adapt and innovate to meet the needs and expectations of their users 3. Allow me to bring food to the library pls 🙏🏻 I only bring biscuits and some drinks 4. Extend the opening time. Most PG students can't utilise their day time to access library. 5. libraries also need to adapt and innovate to meet the needs and expectations of their users 6. More flexible to entry. 7. Need more library skill class so student can know more about how to find books 8. No renovation during study week because it's too loud 9. open library until 12am 10. Provide trainings in hybrid mode to allow part timer or remote students to benefit from them 11. Staff are to noisy 12. The library should be open from the beginning to the end without any break. I would like to request the authority to considering keeping the library open on Sundays and other holidays. Even if various services are not provided, the library should be open for studies. 13. to be open longer hours during weekends 14. improve the wifi connection 15. Improve WIFI connection at Level 1 16. Keep it up improve WIFI signal 17. Strong wifi connection cause certain area tak dapat connection 18. Facilities and Equipment No Comments 1. 1) Carrel room for undergraduate, 2) Musolla for sisters telekung 3) Mussolla @ wudhu (do not need to go to the toilet for abulation) 2. 1) Please provide more accessible plug as most student are using laptop to do work & assignment especially at the open area. 2) Telekung in surau are smelly, need to charge or wash it monthly /weekly to make sure student can pray there comfortably. 3. Air conditioner in study room should be serviced /improved 4. Aircond dekat library & AIKOL panas 5. Hopefully can provide projector or smart-board in discussion room so that can have alternative to do class in the library 6. I have trouble tapping my student card almost every time i enter the library 7. I like that the library is very productive with the advancement of facilities and services to attract the customers. Please keep this productivity going. 8. I would like to humbly request some improvements related to environmental aspects: 1. Signage: Ensure signage is clearer, more visible, and strategically placed for easy navigation throughout the library. 2. Toilets: Consider upgrading the toilets, as some units appear to have water pressure issues, resulting in slow flushing and unpleasant odors. Additionally, increase the cleaning frequency
34 beyond the morning schedule by allocating more cleaners to maintain hygiene throughout the day. 3. Air Ventilation: Address issues of dust and fungal growth on books and collections by improving air circulation and humidity control. This will help preserve materials and promote a healthier environment for visitors. 4. Computer Labs: Upgrade PCs in the computer labs to ensure better performance, faster processing, and compatibility with current software requirements, enhancing user experience and productivity. Thank you very much! 9. Improve aircond temperature 10. Improve the air-cond temperature 11. Increase coway in library 12. It would be great if the chair cushions, particularly in the reading area rooms could be cleaned or washed for better comfort and hygiene 13. library needs to upgrade the facilities. Make new space 14. Maybe air-conditioner 15. More discussion room 16. More plug 17. more water despencer 18. Musolla should be improve , Also the toilet does not have tissue, no place for wudhu either. 19. Open aircond at discussion room 20. Please improve female musolla by providing wudu' area and wash mukanah 21. please improve the facilities 22. Please improve the internet connection at level 1 23. Please make new space more interesting! 24. Please provide more plugs so students can use laptop charger while working at library. The current arrangement of tables are not accessible or near plugs. Please add more plugs at library for students 25. provide fans all carol room 26. Provide Marker for discussion room as part of their facilities 27. the facilities and signage need to be improve. 28. Expand plug suis 19. Library Staff No Comments 1. From my view of opinion, all the staff are very friendly, well serve for customer. 2. I love go to library so much. The environment are very good .Sometimes the staff are kind but i had bad experience and i ignored it. 3. I think this criteria is just awarded to Mr Mohd Rashdan bin Baba, Mr Ahmad Faizal bin Mustafa, Mr Aiman bin Anwar, Mohd Azli bin Sudin. 20. Communication No Comments 1. I would like to humbly request some improvements related to environmental aspects: 1. Signage: Ensure signage is clearer, more visible, and strategically placed for easy navigation throughout the library. 2. Improve the library website. Usually, it takes a long time to open the website. 3. The facilities and signage need to be improve.
customer satisfaction survey report2025DAR AL-HIKMAH LIBRARY KUANTAN CAMPUS INTERNATIONAL ISLAMIC UNIVERSITY MALAYSIA prepared by: Nor iskhandar adnan corporate & client services unit 2025
2025 CUSTOMER SATISFACTION SURVEY REPORT DAR AL-HIKMAH LIBRARY, KUANTAN CAMPUS INTERNATIONAL ISLAMIC UNIVERSITY MALAYSIA Prepared by: NOR ISKHANDAR ADNAN CLIENT & CORPORATE SERVICES UNIT, 2026
1 TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES .....................................................................................................................................................................................................................1 LIST OF FIGURES ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................2 INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................................................................................................................3 Background ................................................................................................................................................................. 3 Objectives..................................................................................................................................................................... 3 Survey Team ................................................................................................................................................................ 4 METHODOLOGY ....................................................................................................................................................................................................................4 Questionnaire Design:................................................................................................................................................. 4 Sampling Technique ................................................................................................................................................... 5 Data Collection: ........................................................................................................................................................... 5 Data Analysis:.............................................................................................................................................................. 5 Reporting ..................................................................................................................................................................... 6 Balance Scorecard Target .......................................................................................................................................... 6 RESULT......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 7 Demographic result ..................................................................................................................................................... 7 Level of satisfaction..................................................................................................................................................... 9 Information resources .............................................................................................................................................. 9 Library services ...................................................................................................................................................... 12 Facilities and equipment ........................................................................................................................................ 14 Library staff ............................................................................................................................................................ 17 Communication and promotion ............................................................................................................................. 19 Overall satisfaction................................................................................................................................................. 22 Frequency and Purposes of Library Visits ............................................................................................................. 24 Purposes of a library visit ...................................................................................................................................... 26 IMPROVEMENT ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................28 FINDING .....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................29 Means Score 2014-2025 .............................................................................................................
2 LIST OF TABLES Table 1: List of 2025 Customer Satisfaction Survey Team DaHLK 4 Table 2: Number of respondents according to Categories and Status 7 Table 3: A means score for sub-categories of Information Resources 10 Table 4: A means score for sub-categories of Library Services 12 Table 5: A means scores for sub-categories of Facilities & Equipment 15 Table 6: A means scores for sub-categories of Library Staff 17 Table 7: A means score for sub-categories of Communication & Promotion 20 Table 8: Open-ended answers for Improvement from respondents 28 Table 9: Means score for five categories 2012-2025 31 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: Number of respondents based on K/C/D/I/O 7 Figure 2: Number of respondents based on Gender 8 Figure 3: Number of respondents based on Nationality 8 Figure 4: A means score for sub-categories of Information Resources 9 Figure 5: Overall means score for sub-categories mean score for Information Resources 2022-2025 11 Figure 6: A means scores for sub-categories of Library Services 12 Figure 7: Overall mean score for sub-categories means score for Library Services 13 Figure 8: A means scores for sub-categories of Facilities & Equipment 14 Figure 9: Overall mean score for sub-categories of Facilities & Equipment 16 Figure 10: A means scores for sub-categories of Library Staff 17 Figure 11: Overall means scores for sub-categories of Library Staff 18 Figure 12: A means scores for sub-categories of Communication & Promotion 20 Figure 13: Overall means scores for sub-categories of Communication & Promotion 21 Figure 14: A means score for Overall Satisfaction Level 22 Figure 15: Overall score means for five categories 23 Figure 16: Frequency of Library Visit 25 Figure 17: Purposes of Library Visit 26 Figure 18: Overall Purposes of Library Visit 27 Figure 19: Overall Means 2012-2025 30
3 INTRODUCTION The report provided an analysis of the Library Customer Satisfaction Survey (CSS), which was conducted to evaluate the level of customer satisfaction and to identify areas for improvement. The survey functions as an important instrument for understanding the perceptions and experiences of library users, offering valuable insights that are essential for enhancing library services. The report presented a comprehensive overview of the survey findings, including satisfaction levels across five key categories; i) Information Resources, ii) Facilities and Equipment, iii) Library Staff, iv) Library Services, and v) Communication & Promotion. Through analysis of the survey, it aimed to support informed decision-making, prioritise improvement initiatives, and promote effective communication between library management and its users. The analysis contributed to the library’s continuous commitment to delivering and sustaining high-quality services and ensuring customer satisfaction. The report focused on a survey conducted at the Dar al-Hikmah Library, Kuantan (DaHLK). The population of these libraries consists of 6479 registered members, as recorded in KOHA, the Library Management System (LMS). Background The Dar al-Hikmah Library has consistently prioritised delivering high-quality services to its clients since its establishment. The library is deeply committed to ongoing improvements across all service areas. To ensure accountability and gauge performance, the library has adopted the Customer Satisfaction Survey as one of its key performance indicators. Since 2008, the library has conducted this survey every two years until 2018. Starting in 2019, this survey has been conducted yearly. The Dar al-Hikmah Library Kuantan began this survey in 2014 to gather valuable feedback from its clients, allowing their perspectives, ideas, and suggestions to shape the library's continuous improvement efforts. This report presents the comprehensive findings of the survey, highlighting important insights and recommendations for enhancing customer satisfaction and meeting the library's commitment to excellence. Objectives The survey aims to achieve the following objectives: i. Identify areas for improvement in five categories: information resources, services, facilities & equipment, library staff, and communication and promotion. ii. Measure and monitor the library's performance over time. iii. Enable clients to provide feedback for the enhancement of the five categories. iv. Facilitate open and honest communication between clients and the library management, providing clients with the opportunity to express their views openly.
4 Survey Team The survey team for the Kuantan campus in 2025 is comprised of ten members, with the Chief Librarian serving as the team's advisor. The list of committee members is shown in Table 1 below: Table 1: List of 2025 Customer Satisfaction Survey team members Team member Committee Nor Hasyimah Mustafa. Advisor. Siti Hawa Darus. Coordinator. Rosyidah Taju Rahim, Iskhandar Adnan. Report writing and editorial. Nor Sahliza Saleh, Muhd Zulnashriq, Muhd. Fitri Iqbal, Siti Khadijah Abdullah. Survey distribution and collection, special task. Nur Laili Ruzzana M.Zukri, Nurhasimah Zuryadi. Data compilation, SPSS & graphic design. METHODOLOGY The 2025 Library Customer Satisfaction Survey utilised a structured questionnaire as the primary instrument for data collection. The survey was designed to obtain valuable feedback and insights from library users regarding their level of satisfaction with various aspects of the library, including information resources, services, facilities and equipment, library staff, communication and promotional activities. The methodology applied in conducting this survey are outlined and discussed in the following paragraphs. Questionnaire Design: The questionnaire was developed to evaluate five key categories of customer satisfaction, namely: i) information resources, ii) services, iii) facilities and equipment, iv) library staff, and v) communication and promotion. The instrument incorporated both closed-ended and open-ended questions to facilitate the collection of quantitative and qualitative data, enabling a more holistic assessment of user satisfaction. The questionnaire was revised from the 2024 survey to better reflect the current range of services offered by the library. The revisions included the addition of response options to ensure alignment with existing library services and user experiences. The questionnaire was organised into two main sections. Part One focused on respondents’ demographic information, while Part Two assessed satisfaction levels across five categories: Information Resources, Library Services, Facilities and Equipment, Library Staff, and Communication and Promotion. In addition, the questionnaire included items on the frequency and purpose of library visits, as well as overall satisfaction with the library. Part Two also featured an open-ended question to encourage respondents to share their opinions, comments, and suggestions for improvement. Overall, the survey enabled respondents to provide comprehensive feedback on various aspects of the library's resources, services, facilities, and performance. A sample of the questionnaire is provided in Appendix B. Sampling Technique The random sampling technique was employed to provide all library users to participate in the
5 survey. This approach involved selecting respondents at regular intervals from the population of library users across the respective campus, thereby reducing potential bias and enhancing the representativeness of the sample. To ensure an appropriate and balanced distribution of respondents, the Sample Size Calculator developed by Raosoft, Inc. was used to determine the required sample size (Appendix A). In this survey, the recommended sample size was 363 respondents drawn from a total population of 6479 registered library users, ensuring that the selected sample would accurately represent the characteristics of the overall population. Notably, a total of 374 respondents participated in the survey, exceeding the targeted sample size and thereby enhancing the reliability and robustness of the findings. Data Collection: The questionnaire was distributed among the selected respondents, who were invited to provide their feedback based on their experiences with the library. The survey was conducted through various channels, including in-person distribution, online platforms, and email invitations, to maximize participation rates and convenience for the respondents. Two data collection methods were utilized to distribute the questionnaires. The first method involved distributing an online form through various channels, including the IIUM Community email, individual WhatsApp messages, group WhatsApp conversations, and the Students Union group. This digital distribution approach allowed for convenient access and ease of completion for respondents who preferred online submissions. The second method involved distributing printed forms at designated locations, such as the General Reading Areas, library counters, classes conducted by liaisons librarian, cafeteria and mahallah. By making physical copies available, the library ensured that clients who preferred or had limited access to online platforms could also participate in the survey. By implementing these two data collection methods, the library aimed to maximise participation and gather feedback from a diverse range of clients, accommodating their preferences and ensuring inclusiveness in the survey process. Data Analysis: Once the data collection phase was completed, all responses were compiled and prepared for analysis. Quantitative data derived from closed-ended questions were analysed using statistical techniques, specifically mean scores, to measure overall customer satisfaction levels. Meanwhile, qualitative data obtained from the open-ended question were systematically coded and analysed using a thematic approach to identify, themes and insights. The data analysis for the Customer Satisfaction Survey was conducted using SPSS (Statistical Package for the Social Sciences), a robust statistical software widely used for data analysis. The collected survey responses were imported into SPSS for examination, analysis, and interpretation
6 to support meaningful conclusions. Descriptive statistics, including mean scores and frequency distributions, were employed to summarise the data, providing an overview of respondents’ satisfaction levels and the distribution of responses across various variables. Using SPSS, the library was able to generate valuable insights into customer satisfaction, identify key strengths and areas for improvement, and support evidence-based decision-making to enhance the overall library experience for its users. Reporting The survey findings were compiled and presented in a comprehensive report, highlighting key insights, emerging trends, and practical recommendations. This report served as an important reference for library management in identifying areas of strength as well as aspects requiring improvement, thereby supporting evidence-based decision-making and strategic planning. By utilising a structured questionnaire as the primary data collection instrument and applying systematic random sampling through RAOSOFT, the 2025 Library Customer Satisfaction Survey ensured a systematic and representative evaluation of customer satisfaction levels. This approach enabled the collection of meaningful feedback and valuable insights, ultimately guiding continuous efforts to enhance library services and address the evolving needs of its users. Balanced Scorecard Target Commencing in 2025, the target mean score for all five survey categories was revised upward from 3.50 to 4.00 as part of the Library's continuous commitment to service excellence and customer satisfaction. This benchmark was established to ensure that customer satisfaction levels consistently exceeded the “Somewhat Satisfied” and “Satisfied” thresholds. By aiming for this target, the library demonstrated its commitment to continuous improvement and to surpassing user expectations, thereby delivering a high standard of service across all areas. RESULT Demographic result The 2025 Customer Satisfaction Survey was conducted to assess the level of satisfaction among library clients across five key categories: information resources, services, facilities and equipment, library staff, and communication and promotion. A total of 374 respondents participated in the survey, exceeding the target of 363 respondents. Table 2: Number of respondents according to Categories and Status Categories Full-time Part-time Contract Basis Total % Academic Staff 30 0 7 37 9.89 Administrative Staff 64 3 9 76 20.32 Foundation Student 44 4 0 48 12.83 Postgraduate Student 33 2 0 35 9.36 Undergraduate Student 176 2 0 178 47.59 TOTAL 347 11 16 374 100%
7 Table 2 presents the distribution of respondents by category and employment/study status. A total of 374 respondents participated in the survey, comprising 347 full-time respondents (92.78%), 11 part-time respondents (2.94%), and 16 contract-based respondents (4.28%). The largest group of respondents was Undergraduate Students, with 178 respondents (47.59%), followed by Administrative Staff with 76 respondents (20.32%). Foundation Students accounted for 48 respondents (12.83%), while Academic Staff and Postgraduate Students contributed 37 respondents (9.89%) and 35 respondents (9.36%), respectively. Most respondents across all categories were full-time members. Contract-based respondents were represented only among Academic Staff (7 respondents) and Administrative Staff (9 respondents), while part-time respondents were presented in all respondent categories except Academic Staff. The distribution indicates that the survey findings were largely influenced by the perspectives of undergraduate students, who formed nearly half of the total respondents, while still ensuring representation from staff and other student groups. Figure 1: Number of respondents based on K/C/D/I/O The highest number of respondents were 19.25% (n=72) of the total, from the Kulliyyah of Science (KOS). Meanwhile, the smallest respondent was from three Kulliyyah (KAED, KOE & KOED), with only one respondent, as shown in Figure 1.
8 Gender Figure 2: Number of respondents based on Gender The gender distribution indicated that most respondents were female, comprising 69.78% (n=261), while 30.22% (n=113) were male. This suggests a slightly higher engagement among female participants in the survey. Nationality Figure 3: Number of respondents based on Nationality Out of 374 respondents, the majority were Malaysian with a total of 366 respondents (97.86%), while 8 respondents (2.14%) were International as illustrated in Figure 3. This indicated that the survey had significantly more participation received from local respondents. Level of satisfaction This section examined the outcomes regarding the mean score for five categories; i) Information Resources, ii) Library Services, iii) Facilities and Equipment, iv) Library Staff, and v) Communication and Promotion.
9 Information resources This category focused on assessing the quality, availability, and accessibility of the library's information resources, such as books, journals, databases, and digital collections. It explores the satisfaction levels regarding the range, relevance, and ease of access to these resources. There are five sub-categories for Information Resources, which are: i. Q1- Required and recommended references as listed in the Course Outlines meet my learning and research needs. ii. Q2- Printed resources (e.g. books, journals, staff etc.) meet my learning and research needs. iii. Q3- Online resources (e.g. online databases, e-books, e-thesis, e-journals etc.) meet iv. learning and research needs. v. Q4- The information resources are current and relevant. Figure 4: A means score for sub-categories of Information Resources Table 3: A means score for sub-categories of Information Resources Respondents Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Means Academic staff 4.35 4.05 4.11 4.24 4.19 Administrative staff 4.34 4.29 4.29 4.33 4.31 Postgraduate students 4.26 4.17 4.26 4.34 4.26 Undergraduate students 4.27 4.22 4.29 4.27 4.26 Foundation students 3.81 3.94 3.88 3.88 3.88
10 Figure 4 and Table 3 showed the statistical analysis of the library customer satisfaction survey for Information Resources indicated an overall high level of satisfaction across respondent groups. Among the five respondent groups, Administrative Staff recorded the highest overall mean score (M = 4.31), followed by Postgraduate Students and Undergraduate Students (both M = 4.26), Academic Staff (M = 4.19), and Foundation Students (M = 3.88). The results suggest that respondents generally perceived the library's information resources as adequate, relevant, and supportive of their learning, teaching, research, and professional needs. Figure 4 and Table 3 present the statistical analysis of customer satisfaction with Information Resources, indicating an overall high level of satisfaction across all respondent groups, with mean scores ranging from 3.88 to 4.31, all exceeding the acceptable benchmark of 4.00. Postgraduate and undergraduate students demonstrated consistent perceptions, each with a mean score of 4.26, and both showed high levels of satisfaction in Q3 with scores of 4.26 and 4.29, respectively. This showed the online resources meet their learning and research needs. In contrast, Foundation Students recorded the lowest overall mean score (3.88), with Q1 receiving the lowest rating (3.81), suggesting opportunities for further enhancement of required and recommended references to better support their academic and foundational needs. Overall, the findings suggest that the library effectively meets user expectations. Nevertheless, targeted improvements may be considered to better support Foundation Students, particularly through enhancing access to required and recommended references, introductory library materials, and academic resources that support foundational learning activities. Figure 5: Overall means score for sub-categories mean score for Information Resources 2022-2025 Figure 5 presents the overall mean scores for the four sub-categories of Information Resources from 2022 to 2025. The results indicate that respondents consistently expressed a high level of satisfaction with the library's information resources, with all mean scores remaining above 4.00 throughout the four- year period.
11 Among the sub-categories, Q1 – Required and recommended references as listed in the Course Outlines meet my learning and research needs recorded the highest score in 2023 (4.35), reflecting users' positive perceptions of the availability and suitability of prescribed academic materials. Similarly, Q3 – Online resources meet my learning and research needs achieved a high score of 4.32 in 2023, highlighting the importance and effectiveness of the library's digital collections in supporting teaching, learning, and research activities. A slight decline in mean scores was observed across all sub-categories in 2024, with scores ranging from 4.08 to 4.15. However, the results showed a positive recovery in 2025, with improvements recorded in all areas. In 2025, Q1 and Q4 – The information resources are current and relevant both achieved the highest mean score of 4.21, indicating users' continued satisfaction with the relevance and quality of the library's collections. Overall, the findings suggest that users remain highly satisfied with the library's information resources. Despite minor fluctuations between 2023 and 2025, the consistently strong ratings demonstrate that the library has successfully maintained a collection that supports users' academic and research needs. Continued efforts to enhance the accessibility, relevance, and quality of both physical and digital collections will help sustain and further improve user satisfaction in this area. Library services This category evaluated the library's services consist of four sub-categories for Library Services, which are: i. Q1- Library Online Catalogue (OPAC) ii. Q2- Library skills classes iii. Q3- Library counters services iv. Q4- Reference or research inquiries The aims are to measure satisfaction with the efficiency, effectiveness, and helpfulness of the services provided by the library staff. Figure 6: A means scores for sub-categories of Library Services
12 Respondents Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Means Academic Staff 4.3 4.24 4.46 4.24 4.31 Administrative Staff 4.25 4.26 4.33 4.34 4.3 Foundation Student 3.98 4.06 4 4 4.01 Postgraduate Student 4.26 4.11 4.43 4.2 4.25 Undergraduate Student 4.11 4.08 4.25 4.2 4.16 Table 4: A means score for sub-categories of Library Services Figure 6 and Table 4 showed that the Library Services category assessed users' satisfaction with the efficiency, effectiveness, and helpfulness of the services provided by the library. The evaluation focused on four service areas: the Library Online Catalogue (OPAC), Library Skills Classes, Library Counter Services, and Reference or Research Inquiries. Overall, respondents reported a high level of satisfaction with the library services, with mean scores ranging from 4.01 to 4.31 across all respondent groups. Academic Staff recorded the highest overall mean score (4.31), followed by Administrative Staff (4.30) and Postgraduate Students (4.25). Undergraduate Students and Foundation Students reported mean scores of 4.16 and 4.01, respectively. Although Foundation Students recorded the lowest overall mean score, the results still indicate a positive level of satisfaction with the library services. Among the four service areas, Library Counter Services (Q3) received the highest ratings from most respondent groups, particularly Academic Staff (4.46) and Postgraduate Students (4.43). This suggests that users highly value the professionalism, responsiveness, and support provided by library staff at service counters. The consistently positive scores across all respondent groups indicate that the library services effectively support users' academic, learning, and research needs. Foundation Students recorded the lowest overall mean score (4.01), with the lowest rating observed for the Library Online Catalogue (OPAC) (3.98). This may indicate a need for additional orientation and user education initiatives to enhance awareness and utilization of library services among new users. Overall, the findings demonstrate that the library is delivering quality services that meet user expectations. Continued efforts to enhance service delivery and user engagement will help maintain and further improve user satisfaction.
13 Figure 7 Overall mean score for sub-categories means score for Library Services Figure 7 presents the overall mean scores for the four sub-categories of Library Services for 2024 and 2025. The results indicate that respondents were highly satisfied with the library services provided, with all sub-categories recording mean scores above 4.00 in both years. An improvement in satisfaction was observed across all service areas from 2024 to 2025. Q3 – Library Counter Services received the highest mean score in both years, increasing from 4.21 in 2024 to 4.29 in 2025. This suggests that users highly value the efficiency, responsiveness, and quality of assistance provided at the library counters. .Q1 – Library Online Catalogue (OPAC) recorded the largest improvement among the four service areas, increasing from 4.09 in 2024 to 4.18 in 2025. Similarly, Q2 – Library Skills Classes improved from 4.11 to 4.15, reflecting positive perceptions of the training and instructional support offered by the library. Q4 – Reference or Research Inquiries also maintained a high level of satisfaction, increasing slightly from 4.19 in 2024 to 4.20 in 2025. This demonstrates users' confidence in the library's ability to provide effective research support and reference assistance. Overall, the findings show a positive upward trend in user satisfaction with library services between 2024 and 2025. The consistently high scores across all sub-categories indicate that the library continues to deliver effective, efficient, and user-centred services that successfully support the academic and research needs of its community. Facilities and equipment This category assesses the physical facilities and equipment available within the library. The category consists of a reading area, study rooms, computer lab, printing, and photocopying facilities, and WIFI access. It aims to gauge satisfaction with the comfort, convenience, and functionality of these resources. There are four sub-categories for Facilities and Equipment as follows:
14 i. Q1- Reading area ii. Q2- Study rooms (Discussion/Carrel/Research rooms, etc.) iii. Q3- Computer Lab iv. Q4- WIFI access Figure 8: A means scores for sub-categories of Facilities & Equipment Table 5: A means scores for sub-categories of Facilities & Equipment Respondent Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Means Academic Staff 4.08 4.05 4 4.24 4.09 Administrative Staff 4.28 4.24 4.25 4.47 4.31 Foundation Student 4.04 4.02 4.04 3.94 4.01 Postgraduate Student 4.29 4.11 4.11 4.17 4.17 Undergraduate Student 4.29 4.24 4.16 4.24 4.23 Figure 8 and Table 5 results indicate a high level of satisfaction with the library's facilities and equipment across all respondent groups, with mean scores ranging from 4.01 to 4.31 on a 5-point scale. Among the respondent categories, Administrative Staff recorded the highest overall satisfaction with a mean score of 4.31, followed by Undergraduate Students (4.23) and Postgraduate Students
15 (4.17). Academic Staff also expressed positive satisfaction with a mean score of 4.09. Meanwhile, Foundation Students reported the lowest overall mean score (4.01), with WiFi Access (Q4) receiving the lowest rating within the group (3.94). This may indicate opportunities to further enhance connectivity, awareness, or user support services for this group. Nevertheless, Foundation Students reported a slightly lower level of satisfaction with WiFi Access (3.94) compared to other facilities, which may indicate opportunities for further enhancement of connectivity, awareness, or user support services for this group. The Reading Area (Q1) was also highly rated, especially by Undergraduate and Postgraduate Students (both 4.29). Satisfaction with Study Rooms (Q2) and the Computer Lab (Q3) remained consistently positive across all respondent groups, with scores ranging from 4.00 to 4.25. Overall, the findings demonstrate that the library has successfully provided facilities and equipment that meet users' expectations. Continued efforts to maintain and enhance physical spaces, technological infrastructure, and digital connectivity will help sustain and further improve user satisfaction. Figure 9: Overall mean score for Sub-Categories of Facilities & Equipment Figure 9 presents the overall mean scores for the four sub-categories of Facilities and Equipment from 2022 to 2025. The results generally indicate that respondents were satisfied with the library's facilities and equipment, with all mean scores remaining above 4.00 throughout the four-year period. Among the sub-categories, Q1 – Reading Area consistently received the highest ratings, recording a score of 4.50 in 2022 and 4.47 in 2023, demonstrating strong user satisfaction with the comfort and suitability of the library's reading spaces. Although the score declined slightly to 4.22 in 2024 and 4.20 in 2025, it remained the highest-rated facility overall. Q2 – Study Rooms (Discussion/Carrel/Research Rooms) also received favourable evaluations, with scores of 4.37 in 2022 and 4.39 in 2023. However, the scores declined to 4.19 in 2024 and 4.13 in 2025. The decrease may reflect the limitations of the temporary library facility at the PLANETIIUM, where only one discussion room was available during the relocation period. Despite this constraint, clients continued to express positive satisfaction with the study room
16 facilities, as reflected by mean scores exceeding 4.00 throughout the period. Q3 – Computer Lab maintained positive ratings across the period, increasing from 4.25 in 2022 to 4.31 in 2023, before declining to 4.07 in 2024 and showing a slight recovery to 4.11 in 2025. Despite the fluctuations, users continued to express satisfaction with the availability and functionality of the computer facilities. Similarly, Q4 – WiFi Access showed a positive trend from 4.22 in 2022 to 4.31 in 2023, followed by a decrease to 4.05 in 2024. Encouragingly, the score improved significantly to 4.21 in 2025, indicating enhanced user satisfaction with internet connectivity and access. Overall, the findings suggest that users remain satisfied with the library's facilities and equipment. While a decline in scores was observed between 2023 and 2024 across all sub-categories, the results for 2025 indicate signs of recovery, particularly in the areas of Computer Lab and WiFi Access. Continuous investment in facility maintenance, technology upgrades, and study space enhancements will help sustain and further improve user satisfaction in this category. Library staff This category focuses on the interactions and assistance provided by the library staff. It examines respondents' satisfaction with the knowledge, professionalism, and responsiveness of the library staff members in addressing inquiries, giving guidance, and supporting clients in their information needs. The sub-categories for Library Staff are as follows: i. Q1- Library staff are professional, approachable, and friendly. ii. Q2- Library staff provide accurate answers to my inquiries. iii. Q3- Library staff are willing to assist and provide helpful information. Figure 10: A means scores for sub-categories of Library Staff Table 6: A means scores for sub-categories of Library Staff Respondents Q1 Q2 Q3 means Academic Staff 4.65 4.65 4.68 4.66
17 Administrative Staff 4.57 4.53 4.57 4.55 Foundation Student 4.00 3.98 3.94 3.97 Postgraduate Student 4.49 4.46 4.54 4.49 Undergraduate Student 4.37 4.37 4.39 4.38 Table 6 presents the mean scores for the sub-categories of Library Staff according to respondent groups. Overall, the results indicate a high level of satisfaction with library staff services, with mean scores ranging from 3.97 to 4.66. Respondents generally agreed that library staff were professional, knowledgeable, approachable, and willing to assist users in meeting their information needs. Academic Staff recorded the highest overall mean score (4.66), reflecting an excellent level of satisfaction with library staff services. Among the three sub-categories, Q3 (Library staff are willing to assist and provide helpful information) received the highest rating (4.68), followed by Q1 and Q2, both scoring 4.65. Administrative Staff reported an overall mean score of 4.55, indicating strong satisfaction with staff performance. The highest ratings were recorded for Q1 and Q3 (both 4.57), while Q2 (Library staff provide accurate answers to my inquiries) scored 4.53. Postgraduate Students also expressed a high level of satisfaction, achieving an overall mean score of 4.49. The highest-rated aspect was Q3 (4.54), followed by Q1 (4.49) and Q2 (4.46), suggesting that respondents particularly appreciated the willingness of library staff to provide assistance and useful information. Undergraduate Students recorded an overall mean score of 4.38, indicating positive perceptions of library staff services. The highest score was observed for Q3 (4.39), while Q1 and Q2 both scored 4.37, demonstrating consistently favorable ratings across all aspects of staff service. Foundation Students recorded the lowest overall mean score (3.97). Although their ratings were lower compared to other respondent groups, the scores remained close to the agreement level, with Q1 (4.00) receiving the highest rating, followed by Q2 (3.98) and Q3 (3.94). In conclusion, the findings demonstrate that respondents were highly satisfied with the services provided by library staff. The highest-rated aspect across most respondent groups was the willingness of library staff to assist and provide helpful information (Q3). The consistently high scores reflect the professionalism, friendliness, and commitment of library staff in supporting users and ensuring positive library experiences.
18 Figure 11: Overall means scores for sub-categories of Library Staff Figure 11 presents the overall mean scores for the three sub-categories of Library Staff from 2022 to 2025. The findings indicate that respondents consistently reported a high level of satisfaction with library staff, with all mean scores remaining above 4.00 throughout the four-year period. Among the three sub-categories, Q3 – Library staff are willing to assist and provide helpful information recorded the highest scores across all years. The score increased from 4.48 in 2022 to 4.55 in 2023, reflecting users' strong appreciation of the helpfulness and commitment demonstrated by library staff. Although the score declined to 4.32 in 2024 and 4.21 in 2025, it remained the highest-rated aspect of staff performance. Similarly, Q1 – Library staff are professional, approachable, and friendly and achieved high ratings, increasing from 4.46 in 2022 to 4.53 in 2023 before declining to 4.31 in 2024 and 4.18 in 2025. These results suggest that users continue to view library staff positively in terms of professionalism and interpersonal skills. Q2 – Library staff provide accurate answers to my inquiries followed a similar pattern, rising from 4.45 in 2022 to 4.51 in 2023, then decreasing to 4.27 in 2024 and 4.15 in 2025. Despite the decline, the scores remain well above the satisfaction benchmark, indicating continued confidence in the knowledge and expertise of library staff. Overall, the results demonstrate that respondents remain highly satisfied with the quality of service provided by library staff. While a gradual decline in scores was observed after 2023, all sub- categories maintained strong ratings above 4.00, reflecting users' continued trust in the professionalism, responsiveness, and helpfulness of library personnel. The findings also support the open-ended survey results, where no suggestions for improvement were received under the Library Staff category, further highlighting the positive perception of staff performance. Continuous staff training and service excellence initiatives will help maintain these high standards and further enhance user satisfaction.
19 Communication and promotion This category evaluated the effectiveness of communication channels and strategies employed by the library. It assesses satisfaction with the clarity, informativeness, and timeliness of communication related to library services, updates, events, and promotions. This included feedback on the accessibility of information through the library's website, social media platforms, and other communication channels. There are four sub-categories for Communication and Promotion which are: i. Q1- Signages are clear and appropriate. ii. Q2- Library websites and social media are informative and interactive. iii. Q3- Updates on Library services, facilities, and activities are prompt. iv. Q4- Library exhibitions are enlightening and interesting. Figure 12: A means scores for sub-categories of Communication & Promotion Table 7: A Means Score for sub-categories of Communication & Promotion Respondents Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Mean s Academic Staff 4.43 4.43 4.51 4.38 4.44 Administrative Staff 4.28 4.32 4.34 4.30 4.31 Postgraduate Student 4.40 4.23 4.31 4.31 4.31 Undergraduate Student 4.27 4.22 4.21 4.24 4.24 Foundation Student 4.00 4.00 3.98 4.00 4.00 Overall, the category recorded positive satisfaction levels across all respondent groups, with mean scores ranging from 4.00 to 4.44, indicating that respondents generally agreed that the library communicates effectively and promotes its services well.
20 Academic Staff recorded the highest overall mean score (4.44), demonstrating the greatest level of satisfaction with the library's communication and promotional efforts. Among the four sub- categories, Q3 (Updates on Library services, facilities, and activities are prompt) achieved the highest score (4.51), followed by Q1 (Signages are clear and appropriate) and Q2 (Library website and social media are informative and interactive), both scoring 4.43. Administrative Staff reported a strong overall mean score of 4.31. The highest-rated aspect was Q3 (4.34), suggesting satisfaction with the timeliness of information dissemination, while the remaining sub-categories scored between 4.28 and 4.32. Postgraduate Students also recorded an overall mean score of 4.31. Their highest rating was for Q1 (4.40), indicating satisfaction with the clarity and appropriateness of library signages. The lowest score within this group was Q2 (4.23), although it still reflected a positive level of satisfaction. Undergraduate Students, the largest respondent group, recorded an overall mean score of 4.24. The highest score was observed for Q1 (4.27), while Q3 (4.21) received the lowest rating. Nevertheless, all scores remained above 4.20, indicating favorable perceptions of the library's communication and promotional activities. Foundation Students recorded the lowest overall mean score (4.00). Their ratings were consistent across all sub-categories, with scores ranging from 3.98 to 4.00. Although slightly lower than those of other respondent groups, the results still indicate satisfaction with the library's communication and promotion initiatives. In conclusion, the findings show that respondents were generally satisfied with the library's communication channels and promotional activities. The highest-rated aspect across most respondent groups was the promptness of updates on library services, facilities, and activities (Q3), while Foundation Students demonstrated comparatively lower but still positive satisfaction levels. These results suggest that the library has been effective in communicating information and engaging users through its various communication platforms and promotional activities. Figure 13: Overall means scores for sub-categories of Communication & Promotion
21 Figure 13 illustrates the overall mean scores for the four sub-categories of Communication and Promotion from 2022 to 2025. The results indicate that respondents consistently expressed positive perceptions of the library’s communication channels and promotional activities throughout the four-year period, with all mean scores remaining above 4.00. In 2022, the highest mean score was recorded for Q4 (Library exhibitions are enlightening and interesting) at 4.33, followed by Q1 (Signages are clear and appropriate) and Q2 (Library website and social media are informative and interactive), both scoring 4.26. Q3 (Updates on library services, facilities, and activities are prompt) recorded the lowest score at 4.19.In 2023, all sub- categories showed improvement compared to 2022. Q4 remained the highest-rated aspect with a score of 4.36, while Q2 and Q3 increased to 4.35 and 4.34, respectively. Q1 recorded a slightly lower but still positive score of 4.25. A noticeable decline was observed in 2024, where all four sub-categories recorded similar mean scores ranging from 4.07 to 4.08. Although lower than the previous two years, the scores still indicated a satisfactory level of user perception towards the library’s communication and promotional efforts. In 2025, the mean scores improved across all sub-categories compared to 2024. Q1 achieved the highest score (4.26), followed closely by Q3 (4.25) and both Q2 and Q4 (4.24). This improvement suggests that users perceived enhancements in the effectiveness of the library’s communication channels, information dissemination, and promotional activities.Overall, the findings show that Communication and Promotion maintained consistently positive ratings from 2022 to 2025. While a temporary decline occurred in 2024, the scores recovered in 2025, demonstrating the library’s continued efforts to improve communication strategies, provide timely updates, and engage users through various promotional initiatives. Overall satisfaction In this survey, the respondents were also asked about their overall satisfaction with the library. Figure 14 below shows the results of a means score for their overall satisfaction. Figure 14: A Means score for overall satisfaction level
22 Figure 14 presents the overall mean satisfaction scores by respondent group from 2022 to 2025. Overall, all respondent groups reported high levels of satisfaction with the library, with mean scores generally exceeding 4.00 across the four-year period.This indicates that users continued to perceive the library’s resources, services, facilities, and staff positively. Among the respondent groups, academic staff recorded the most notable improvement in 2025, achieving the highest mean score of 4.39, compared to 4.31 in 2022, 4.20 in 2023, and 3.86 in 2024. This substantial increase suggests a significant improvement in their perception of the library’s overall performance. Administrative Staff consistently reported high satisfaction levels, with mean scores of 4.42 in 2022, 4.17 in 2023, 4.03 in 2024, and 4.25 in 2025. Although satisfaction declined between 2022 and 2024, the score improved to 4.25 in 2025, indicating a recovery in users’ perceptions of the library. Postgraduate students demonstrated relatively stable satisfaction throughout the four years, with scores ranging from 4.06 to 4.22. Their mean score increased from 4.06 in both 2023 and 2024 to 4.22 in 2025, indicating an improvement in overall satisfaction. Similarly, undergraduate students maintained consistently positive perceptions of the library. Their satisfaction score increased from 4.00 in 2024 to 4.27 in 2025, representing the largest improvement among the student groups. This suggests that initiatives implemented during the year may have effectively addressed their needs and expectations. Overall, the findings indicate that user satisfaction remained positive across all respondent groups, with notable improvements recorded in 2025, particularly among academic staff and undergraduate students, reflecting the library’s continued efforts to enhance service quality and user experience. Figure 15: Overall score means for five categories Figure 15 presents the overall mean scores for the five assessment categories from 2022 to 2025. Overall, all categories consistently achieved mean scores above 4.00, indicating a high level of user satisfaction with the library’s resources, services, facilities, staff, and communication efforts throughout the four-year period.
23 Among the five categories, Library Staff recorded the highest mean scores across all years, achieving 4.46 in 2022, 4.35 in 2023, 4.26 in 2024, and 4.33 in 2025. These results reflect users’ continued appreciation of the professionalism, helpfulness, and competence of library personnel. Library Services showed strong performance, increasing from 4.28 in 2022 to 4.36 in 2023 before declining slightly to 4.15 in 2024 and improving to 4.21 in 2025. Similarly, Information Resources rose from 4.22 in 2022 to 4.32 in 2023, followed by a decrease to 4.12 in 2024 and a modest recovery to 4.18 in 2025. For Facilities & Equipment, the mean score declined gradually from 4.27 in 2022 to 4.19 in 2023 and 4.13 in 2024, before showing a slight improvement to 4.15 in 2025. Although this category recorded the lowest score among the five categories in 2025, the result still indicates a generally positive level of satisfaction. Communication & Promotion achieved a mean score of 4.36 in 2022, decreased to 4.26 in 2023 and 4.07 in 2024, and then rebounded to 4.23 in 2025. This improvement suggests that recent efforts to enhance communication channels and promotional activities have been positively received by users. Overall, the findings demonstrate that users remained highly satisfied with all aspects of library performance from 2022 to 2025. While slight declines were observed in several categories during 2024, the improvements recorded in 2025 indicate a positive trend and the library’s ongoing commitment to maintaining and enhancing service quality. Frequency and Purposes of Library Visits The survey also examined the frequency and purposes of respondents’ visits to the library. This analysis aims to provide insights into how often users utilise library services and the factors that motivate their visits. Understanding both the frequency and purposes of library visits offers valuable information about the diverse needs, preferences, and interests of library users. The identified purposes include attending classes, completing assignments, accessing library services and facilities, participating in events or programmes, and socialising. The findings help to illustrate how the library supports academic, informational, and social activities among its users. Detailed results are presented in the following section.
24 Figure 16: Frequency of Library Visit Figure 16 presents the frequency of library visits among respondents. A total of 374 respondents participated in the survey, and the findings indicate varying patterns of library usage across different user groups. Overall, the most common frequency of library visits was once per semester, reported by 137 respondents (36.6%), followed by never visiting the library with 102 respondents (27.3%). Meanwhile, 70 respondents (18.7%) visited the library monthly, 51 respondents (13.6%) visited weekly, and only 14 respondents (3.7%) reported visiting the library daily. Among Academic Staff, the majority (21 respondents; 56.8%) visited the library once per semester, while 14 respondents (37.8%) visited monthly. Only 2 respondents (5.4%) indicated that they never visited the library, and none reported daily or weekly visits. For Administrative Staff, the largest group (31 respondents; 40.8%) visited the library once per semester, followed by monthly visits (16 respondents; 21.1%). A notable proportion (14 respondents; 18.4%) reported never visiting the library, while 9 respondents (11.8%) visited weekly and 6 respondents (7.9%) visited daily. Among Foundation Students, the majority (28 respondents; 58.3%) indicated that they never visited the library, representing the highest proportion of non-users among all respondent groups. Only 3 respondents (6.3%) visited monthly, while 10 respondents (20.8%) visited once per semester and 7 respondents (14.6%) visited weekly. Postgraduate Students demonstrated more frequent library usage compared to other groups. The highest number (11 respondents; 31.4%) visited the library once per semester, followed closely by weekly visits (10 respondents; 28.6%) and monthly visits (8 respondents; 22.9%). Only 4 respondents (11.4%) reported never visiting the library. Among Undergraduate Students, the largest respondent group, 64 respondents (36.0%) visited the
25 library once per semester, while 54 respondents (30.3%) reported never visiting. Monthly visits were reported by 29 respondents (16.3%), and 25 respondents (14.0%) visited weekly. Only 6 respondents (3.4%) visited the library daily. In conclusion, the findings indicate that once-per-semester visits were the most common pattern of library use among respondents, while a substantial proportion of users, particularly Foundation and Undergraduate students, reported never visiting the library. The results suggest opportunities for the library to strengthen user engagement and encourage more frequent utilization of library facilities, resources, and services, especially among student groups with lower visitation rates. Purposes of a library visit In this survey, respondents were asked about the purpose of their visit to the library. There are six purposes provided in this survey, and respondents may select more than one answer. tend to Figure 17 Purposes of Lib Figure 17: Purposes of Library Visit Figure 17 presents the purposes of library visits according to respondent categories. Since respondents were allowed to select more than one purpose, the total responses exceed the number of respondents. Assignment-related activities were the most common reason for visiting the library, particularly among undergraduate students (130 responses), followed by services (99 responses) and facilities (96 responses). Undergraduate students recorded the highest number of responses across most categories, indicating their extensive use of library resources and spaces. Library services were frequently utilized by undergraduate students (99 responses), administrative staff (44 responses), and postgraduate students (24 responses). The use of library facilities was also prominent, with undergraduate students (96 responses) and foundation students (27 responses)
26 reporting substantial usage. Attendance for classes was mainly reported by undergraduate students (91 responses) and foundation students (30 responses), while events and programmes attracted participation from all respondent groups, particularly undergraduate students (67 responses) and administrative staff (25 responses). Socializing was the least selected purpose overall, although undergraduate students (52 responses) and foundation students (17 responses) still reported using the library as a social space. Overall, the findings suggest that the library continues to serve primarily as a place for academic- related activities, while also functioning as a venue for accessing services, utilizing facilities, attending programmes, and social interaction. Figure 18: Overall Purposes of Library Visit Figure 18 presents the overall purposes of library visits reported by respondents. As multiple responses were allowed, the total number of responses exceeds the total number of respondents. Among the purposes listed, assignment-related activities recorded the highest number of responses (224), indicating that academic work remains the primary reason for library visits. This was followed by the use of library services (210) and library facilities (177), demonstrating the importance of the library's resources, support services, and study environment to users. Attendance for classes accounted for 154 responses, while participation in events and programmes recorded 144 responses, suggesting that the library also plays a significant role in supporting teaching, learning, and community engagement activities. The least selected purpose was socializing, with 109 responses. Nevertheless, the result indicates that the library continues to serve as a social and collaborative space for some users. Overall, the findings show that respondents primarily visit the library for academic and learning- related purposes, while also benefiting from the library’s services, facilities, educational programmes, and opportunities for social interaction.
27 IMPROVEMENT A total of 114 suggestions were received from respondents through the open-ended question. The feedback was categorized into five themes corresponding to the main areas evaluated in the survey. Table 8: Open-ended answers for Improvement from respondents THEMES IMPROVEMENT INFORMATION RESOURCES 8 LIBRARY SERVICES 13 FACILITIES & EQUIPMENT 89 LIBRARY STAFF 0 COMMUNICATION & PROMOTION 4 TOTAL 114 Table 8 presented the thematic analysis of open-ended responses from the Survey, highlighting key areas where users proposed improvements. The analysis reveals that Facilities and Equipment received the highest number of suggestions (89 responses, 78.1% of all feedback), indicating that respondents consider improvements to the library's physical environment and technological infrastructure as the highest priority. Common concerns and recommendations in this area may relate to study spaces, seating, computer facilities, WiFi connectivity, and other physical amenities. Library Services was the second most frequently mentioned theme, with 13 suggestions (11.4%), highlighting users' interest in enhancing service delivery and expanding library support. Information Resources accounted for 8 suggestions (7.0%), reflecting a need for continuous development and updating of library collections and information resources. Only 4 suggestions (3.5%) were related to Communication and Promotion, suggesting that respondents were generally satisfied with the library's communication efforts. Notably, no suggestions were received under the Library Staff theme, indicating a high level of satisfaction with the professionalism, helpfulness, and responsiveness of library personnel. Overall, the findings suggest that while users are generally satisfied with the library's services and staff, greater attention should be given to improving facilities and equipment, as this area represents the most significant concern among respondents. These insights provide valuable guidance for future planning and resource allocation to enhance user satisfaction and library service quality. FINDING The findings indicate a high level of satisfaction across all categories, with mean scores ranging from 4.16 to 4.46, demonstrating that respondents were generally satisfied with the library’s resources, services, facilities, staff, and communication efforts. Among the five categories, Library Staff received the highest mean score (4.46), indicating that
28 respondents were particularly satisfied with the professionalism, friendliness, responsiveness, and helpfulness of library staff. This result highlights the important role of library personnel in delivering quality services and creating positive user experiences. The second-highest score was recorded for Communication (4.26), suggesting that respondents were satisfied with the effectiveness of the library’s communication channels, promotional activities, website, social media platforms, and dissemination of information regarding library services and events. Library Services achieved a mean score of 4.21, reflecting positive perceptions of the services provided by the library and their ability to meet users’ needs and expectations. Information Resources recorded a mean score of 4.18, indicating that respondents were generally satisfied with the availability, accessibility, and relevance of the library’s collections and information resources. The category Facilities & Equipment received the lowest mean score (4.16). Although this score still reflects a high level of satisfaction, it suggests that respondents perceived slightly more room for improvement in areas related to library facilities, study spaces, equipment, and physical infrastructure compared to the other categories. Overall, the results demonstrate that the library successfully met users’ expectations across all service dimensions. The consistently high mean scores, all exceeding 4.00, indicate strong customer satisfaction and reflect the library’s commitment to providing quality resources, services, facilities, communication, and staff support. The outstanding performance of Library Staff serves as a key strength, while Facilities & Equipment may be considered an area for continuous enhancement to further improve the overall user experience. Means Score 2014-2025 Initially, the target mean score for the Library Customer Satisfaction Survey was set at 3.00 on a 4-point Likert scale. In 2018, the Library Management revised the target and adopted a 5-point Likert scale, with the target mean score increased to 3.50. Effective from 2025, the target mean score was further raised to 4.00 and will remain in effect until otherwise directed by the Library Management.
29 Figure 19: Overall Means 2014-2025 The overall mean scores of the Library Customer Satisfaction Survey indicate that customer satisfaction has consistently exceeded the established targets throughout the assessment period. Under the previous 4-point Likert scale, the library achieved mean scores of 3.16 in 2014 and 3.25 in 2016, both surpassing the target score of 3.00. Following the adoption of a 5-point Likert scale in 2018, with a revised target mean score of 4.00, the library continued to perform well. The overall mean score increased significantly to 4.16 in 2018 and remained above 4.00 in subsequent years. Although there were slight fluctuations, the scores consistently exceeded the target, reflecting a high level of customer satisfaction with library services and facilities. The highest mean score was recorded in 2023 (4.31), indicating the strongest level of customer satisfaction during the period under review. While the score declined slightly to 4.14 in 2024, it improved again to 4.30 in 2025, suggesting that the library successfully maintained and enhanced service quality. Overall, the results demonstrate the library's continued commitment to meeting user expectations and delivering quality services. The sustained achievement of mean scores well above the target level indicates positive user perceptions and satisfaction with the library's performance over time. Means Score for five categories 2012-2025 Table 9 presents the mean satisfaction scores for the five library service categories from 2014 to 2025. The results demonstrate a substantial improvement in user satisfaction across all categories over the years, with scores increasing from moderate levels in 2014 to consistently high levels above 4.00 from 2018 onwards.
30 Table 9: Means Score for five categories 2014-2025. Library Staff recorded the highest levels of satisfaction throughout most of the assessment period. The mean score increased from 3.31 in 2014 to 4.53 in 2023, before remaining high at 4.46 in 2025. This indicates sustained confidence in the professionalism, knowledge, and helpfulness of library personnel. Library Services also showed notable growth, rising from 3.19 in 2014 to 4.46 in 2025, representing the highest score among all categories in the latest survey. This suggests continuous improvement in service delivery and user support. For Information Resources, satisfaction improved significantly from 2.98 in 2014 to 4.18 in 2025. Although a slight decline was observed between 2023 (4.32) and 2024 (4.12), the category demonstrated a positive recovery in 2025. Facilities and Equipment exhibited a generally positive trend, increasing from 3.16 in 2014 to 4.16 in 2025. While the category experienced some fluctuations, particularly between 2023 and 2024, satisfaction levels remained consistently high and above 4.00. Similarly, Communication and Promotion improved from 3.11 in 2014 to 4.26 in 2025. The category showed steady growth over the years, reflecting enhanced effectiveness in disseminating information, promoting library activities, and engaging users through various communication channels. Overall, the findings indicate that the library has successfully enhanced user satisfaction across all service dimensions over the past decade. Although minor fluctuations were observed between 2023 and 2025, the consistently high scores demonstrate the library's commitment to continuous improvement and its ability to meet the evolving needs and expectations of users. In 2025, all categories achieved mean scores above 4.00, signifying a high level of user satisfaction with the library's resources, services, facilities, staff, and communication efforts. CONCLUSION The results of the Customer Satisfaction Survey 2025 indicated that the library has made substantial progress in meeting and exceeding user expectations across all service areas. Overall satisfaction scores have consistently remained above the institutional benchmark since 2020, demonstrating the effectiveness of continuous improvement efforts in service delivery, facilities enhancement, communication, and information resources. Notably, Library Staff and Library Services achieved the highest ratings, highlighting the critical role of staff professionalism and effective outreach in enhancing the overall user experience. Categories 2014 2016 2018 2019 2020 2022 2023 2024 2025 Information Resources 2.98 3.02 3.95 3.98 4.00 4.2 4.32 4.1191 4.18 Library Services 3.19 3.26 4.26 4.18 4.22 4.28 4.35 4.1505 4.21 Facilities & Equipment 3.16 3.28 4.28 4.21 4.26 4.26 4.12 4.1329 4.16 Library Staff 3.31 3.36 4.37 4.34 4.38 4.46 4.53 4.1505 4.46 Communication 3.11 3.20 3.95 4.01 4.06 4.25 4.32 4.0713 4.26
31 While the findings confirm a strong level of overall satisfaction, they also point to opportunities for further improvement, particularly in sustaining the quality of Information Resources and upgrading Facilities & Equipment to better support evolving user needs. Moving forward, the library should remain committed to maintaining high service standards, strengthening continuous improvement initiatives, and aligning its strategies with changing user expectations to ensure a dynamic, accessible, and user-centred learning environment. In summary, the library should implement a systematic review of information resources and invest in updated online and print collections to ensure continued relevance and support for academic needs. Additionally, the library should enhance facilities and equipment through regular maintenance, technological upgrades, and user-focused improvements to maintain a comfortable and efficient learning environment.
32 APPENDIX A SAMPLE SIZE CALCULATOR BY RAOSOFT, INC.
33 APPENDIX B CUSTOMER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2025 Congratulations on being the respondent to the survey. The Dar al-Hikmah Library, IIUM conducts this survey annually to assess the library customers’ level of satisfaction with the library services, resources, and facilities at the campus libraries. Please take a moment to complete this questionnaire. We will make sure that your participation is anonymous. Collected data will only be accessible to the library researchers conducting the survey. We appreciate your cooperation. Thank you. 1. Status: Ο Full time Ο Part-time Ο Contract basis 2. Category: Ο Academic Staff Ο Administrative Staff Ο Postgraduate Student Ο Undergraduate Student Ο Foundation Student 3. Kulliyyah/Centre/ Institute/Office: Ο AIKOL Ο KAED Ο KAHS Ο KON Ο INHART Ο AHAS KIRKHS Ο KOED Ο KICT Ο KOM Ο KOD Ο CELPAD Ο PLANETIIUM Ο KENMS Ο KOE Ο IIiBF Ο ISTAC Ο KOP Ο KOS Ο KSTCL Ο CFS Ο SASMEC Ο Others: Ο IIUM ACADEMY 4. 5. 6. Campus: Gender: Nationality: Ο Gombak Ο Male Ο Malaysian Ο Kuantan Ο Female Ο International Ο Gambang Ο Pagoh Ο Kuala Lumpur PART 2 – Please indicate how satisfied you are with the library A. INFORMATION RESOURCES To what extent are you satisfied with the following information resources: Very Dissatisfied Dissatisfied Somewhat Satisfied Satisfied Very Satisfied 1. Required and recommended references as listed in the Course Outlines meet my learning and research needs Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο 2. Printed resources (e.g. books, journals, etc.) meet my learning and research needs Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο 3. Online resources (e.g. online databases, e-books, e-thesis, e- journals etc.) meet my learning and research needs Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο 4. The information resources are current and relevant Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο B. SERVICES To what extent are you satisfied with the following services: Very Dissatisfied Dissatisfied Somewhat Satisfied Satisfied Very Satisfied 1. Library Online Catalog Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο 2. Library Skills Classes Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο 3. Library counters services Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο 4. Reference or research enquiries Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο PART 1 – Please choose your background information
34 C. FACILITIES & EQUIPMENT To what extent are you satisfied with the following facilities & equipment: Very Dissatisfied Dissatisfied Somewhat Satisfied Satisfied Very Satisfied 1. Reading area Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο 2. Study rooms (Discussion/Carrel/Research rooms, etc.) Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο 3. Computer Lab Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο 4. WIFI access Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο D. LIBRARY STAFF Satisfaction with the helpfulness/timely/friendliness/convenience of the staff in dealing with library clients. Very Dissatisfied Dissatisfied Somewhat Satisfied Satisfied Very Satisfied 1. Library staff are professional, approachable and friendly Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο 2. Library staff provide accurate answers to my enquiries Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο 3. Library staff are willing to assist and provide helpful information Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο E. COMMUNICATION AND PROMOTION Satisfaction with how information is communicated (medium/speed/language used, etc.) Very Dissatisfied Dissatisfied Somewhat Satisfied Satisfied Very Satisfied 1. Signage is clear and appropriate Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο 2. Library website and social media are informative and interactive Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο 3. Updates on Library services, facilities and activities are prompt Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο 4. Library exhibitions are enlightening and interesting Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο F. How frequently do you visit the library? Ο Daily Ο Weekly Ο Monthly Ο Once per semester Ο Never G. What are your purposes for coming to the library? (You may select more than one answer) Ο Classes Ο Socializing Ο Borrowing/returning books Ο Events/Programmes Ο Assignment/Research Ο Using library facilities (e.g. Labs, internet, rooms, etc.) H. Overall, are you satisfied with the Library? Ο Very Dissatisfied Ο Dissatisfied Ο Somewhat Satisfied Ο Satisfied Ο Very Satisfied I. Any suggestion(s) to improve the library services? ___________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________ Thank you for taking the time to complete this questionnaire. If you have any inquiries, please contact the following: Dar al-Hikmah Library Gombak: 03-64214815 Syed Muhammad Naquib al-Attas Library: 03-64211260 Dar al-Hikmah Library Kuantan: 09-5704180 Dar al-Hikmah Library Centre for Foundation Studies: 09-5183480 Pagoh Campus Library: 06-9742425
35 APPENDIX C List of open-ended answers for Improvement according to five categories. 1. Information Resources No. Comments 1. Increase access to reputable journals online 2. Inaccessible Wiley Online Library using IIUM account. I hope IIUM can reconsider to continue with Wiley so that student can access article from Wiley for research and academic purpose. 3. no money no talk they say- with budget cuts more and more what options do we have? *some questions above are more appropriate for students not academic staff recent & updated resources are very very limited so I have given up a long time ago (sorry not sorry) 4. It would be very helpful if online databases can be access easily on-campus or off campus. Some of the database such as Science Direct and Elsevier are still required to have access in order to view the paper.(17) 5. I highly recommend for a book festival or something like that in the future. Thank youu 6. Information literacy workshop like how to search journals or cite sources Create relaxation corner or mental health break spaces 7. To update and frequently check the online databases. Some are not accessible anymore via EZproxy, such as Wiley Online Library. Thank you. (58) 8. Please consider providing additional books for children 9. Please organize more workdays for research and publication. A refresher course of the basic knowledge also will be beneficial for the coach. (43) 2. Services No Comments 1. I want to thank the Library Liaison officer for their pro active support and help whenever needed. 2. Can you extend time closing until night when weekdays, while weekend until 7pm (except Saturday). Saturday maybe can until night also.Cause, due to lack of library in campus and also places to study. That's why need extra time to study. (15) 3. Make it more accessible to students (providing transport) (19) 4. Shorten ofice hour (26) 5. More events (36) 6. Please organize more workdays for research and publication. A refresher course of the basic knowledge also will be beneficial for the coach. (43) 7. Teach us how to find book at desk 8. make a program 9. Service where it is Easier for people to find the book they are looking for 10. make library more entertaining 11. I'm currently working too; thus, the only time I'm able to visit the library is after office hours. Prior to this, the opening time was until 10pm, but now it's only till 7pm. I hope the library can be opened for extended hours till 10pm for students like me, the PG. (57) 12. Open until night for students to come study for the final exam period. (61) 13. Maybe the library's operating hours should be longer.
36 14. Facilities and Equipment No Comments 1. Hopefully, the original building in Kuantan Campus will be opened soon. 2. When will the library in IIUM Kuantan campus open? Missed those big spaces 3. Water dispenser (18) 4. Free water (Coway), cafe (mini cafe) and private /solo compartment needed. Good service from the staff. Will comeback Insyaallah. (20) 5. please open library at campus asap 6. Request water cooler 7. Include more cozy space for study and more hipster 8. provide an ablution area near the prayer room 9. More cozy facilities such as cozy chair and desk, and more private desk for study and difficult to find water dispenser 10. add lounge pantry, add coffee machine 11. Add lounge pantry and a place for students to comfortably discuss without disturbing others. 12. tempat utk bincang gorup assignment yg sesuai / ekon / cozy 13. I wish there would be rolling ladder, computer, harry potter aesthetics, calm atmosphere, air conditioning, scented well (preferably books smell), table lamp (preferably green like those in kdrama), locker for belongings, food stalls and etc. 14. Transforming the library into a hipster cafe library and adding a kids section with activities could attract more visitor and help generate additional income. 15. Need a cafe and more facilities to accommodate staff (to bring child) 16. Buat cafe 17. add on cafe corner 18. ada komputer senang diakses 19. letak cafe corner 20. accessible cafe station / area for students to take a break and coffee time to relax themselves while studying 21. Cold Water dispenser 22. provide more private room 23. affordable cafe 24. You may provide a room for people to solat and maybe you can add coway 25. Provide cafe 26. Cafe 27. Maybe can put a cafe in it? Or like a sport like library Kuantan did it (F1 or other staff) ? 28. please accelerate the renovation process of library as i really need library for studying. i cant focus study in my room. 29. I am quite disappointed that the library at IIUM is undergoing a long-term renovation. Unfortunately, the temporary library is located too far away for me to commute to easily. 30. Add cafes in the library, improve carrel room facilities and add more carrel room 31. Having a cafe there 32. cafe dlm library, carrel room, more discussion study outside 33 Maybe more spaces so it can accommodate more student on each the brother and sister 34 More places for study with cozy environment 35 provide more private room for discussion 36 Current library at Jalan Hospital lack of place to charge laptop . 37 Only the air conditioner needs to be colder. Thank you (29)
37 38 Please come back to IMC 39 Please move to IM campus 40 More online/physical classes would be great. From my experience at UPM, sessions like Mendeley, Turnitin, and online databases were offered both online and in person. Even it is repetitive, they’re still very helpful and well attended. They called it as tuesday training classes. But if this has already been done, im sorry maybe I wasn’t aware of the classes. If so, I’d appreciate it if you could share the promotion via email, and we can definitely encourage our students to join especially in semester that require them to do research project. Thank you =) 41 Please open the one in the main campus.. it's too far 42 Cepat la bukak kat Kuantan Campus tu... Jauh ngat nak g JHC 43 Provides more tables and chairs (accommodations) for students to study (30) 44 Please provide more tables and chairs for students and plug-to-charging (31) 45 Table, chair, cat library the shelf rapikan letak penyapu n mop 46 Food 47 Open the Kuantan Library within the campus. JHC is too far. 48 Allow students to bring in drinks such as coffee, water bottle 49 Preferable to have isolation room/section where there a separate table one by one for one individual who really want to focus, the environment there must be quiet. Cafe for students. Please allow the student to bring their drink and coffee in the library too, just add denda if they tumpahkan ke apa. 50 student lounge 51 Pls open ASAP HUHU i love library 52 idk i havent been to the library yet since im a first year student but i hope theres gonna be like coffee corner since i plan on studying there for quite some times but if its not possible maybe we can bring some outside drinks, the aircond is functioning well, theres like maybe some comics and novels so tht i can take a break by reading those, many plugs so students can charge their devices, and the vibe is cozy like no bright colour like green or purple in the library i hate tht 53 more personal space 54 PLEASE RETURN LIBRARY UIA KUANTAN 55 Provide area to eat and significantly separate the female and male area. Provide big surau……… 56 -The library is soo cold. I wish it can be altered according to the best temperature at the time. - 57 Library website has minimal information about the campus libraries and their facilities and services. Make it easier for users to find the information online. Some of the facilities, furniture, and appliances are old. PC di computer lab ada yang screen sangat buruk dan slow. If possible, have newer/better stuff for a more comfortable experience. 58 To provide an electrical extension for the electrical plug, in case heavy usage happens. (32) 59 Hope the Library Kuantan can open soon as possible (34) 60 Since IIUM Kuantan Library moved to Jln Hospital, I rarely go to the library. Hopefully, Indera Mahkota Library can be use as soon as possible (39) 61 Increase number of chair in the discussion room (44) 62 Please provide a program in the library for kids to also come to the library. This will help
38 our staff and people to do their searching while having their kids occupied. (46) 63 To return Indera Mahkota ASAP (49) 64 make the renovation faster even though I know our cohort will never can feel the vibe 65 Need cafe around library to tea time 66 We want cafe 67 Upgrade wifi 68 open IMC library 69 More space for games 70 Provide more spaces for study 71 Update the speed of the internet 72 bila buka kat IMC 73 Many PG students and staff are married; therefore, it is hard to travel to the town to go to the Jln Hospital Library, plus it is isolated and scary to go alone. i hope the IM Library repairing were will be completed as soon as possible because we all miss the library (52) 74 cafe 75 cafe 76 Aircond terlalu sejuk 77 Please make a cafe 78 Upgrade wifi 79 Computer access 80 cafe hipster 81 develop an aesthetic cafe like library cafe? 82 Cepatla siap, kitorang tk sabar 83 aesthetic cafe (have coffee matcha and cookies) 84 cafe with various drinks like coffee and food like waffle and cookies 85 Provide mini pantries at each corner. Provide a dedicated room with a large screen for students’ relaxation and viewing of educational programmes. 86 Add more sofas, more comfortable chairs with cushions, and bean bags. Bigger cafeteria area. 24-hour open area. (63) 87 24-hour open spare library (with air conditioning and lots of tables and sofas). To study and do work (very important). (65) 88 New space 89 Easy access for student 15. Communication No Comments 1. Make a clear signage not using a manila card 16. Staff No Comments 1. I want to thank the Library Liaison officer for their pro active support and help whenever needed.
customer satisfaction survey report2025SYED MUHAMMAD NAQUIB AL-ATTAS LIBRARY (ISTAC-IIUM) INTERNATIONAL ISLAMIC UNIVERSITY MALAYSIA prepared by: ahmad zaki bin rashid customer services unit 2025
2025 CUSTOMER SATISFACTION SURVEY REPORT SYED MUHAMMAD NAQUIB AL-ATTAS LIBRARY INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE OF ISLAMIC THOUGHT AND CIVILIZATION (ISTAC-IIUM) KUALA LUMPUR CAMPUS INTERNATIONAL ISLAMIC UNIVERSITY MALAYSIA Prepared by: AHMAD ZAKI BIN RASHID HEAD OF SERVICE UNIT SYED MUHAMMAD NAQUIB AL-ATTAS LIBRARY(SMNAL) 2026
i TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES .............................................................................................................................................................................ii LIST OF FIGURES ..........................................................................................................................................................................iii INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................................................ 4 Background ................................................................................................................................................................. 4 Objectives..................................................................................................................................................................... 4 Survey Team ................................................................................................................................................................ 5 METHODOLOGY ........................................................................................................................................................................... 5 Questionnaire Design:................................................................................................................................................. 5 Sampling Technique ................................................................................................................................................... 6 Data Collection: ........................................................................................................................................................... 6 Data Analysis:.............................................................................................................................................................. 6 Reporting ..................................................................................................................................................................... 7 Balance Scorecard Target .......................................................................................................................................... 7 RESULT ............................................................................................................................................................................................ 7 Demographic result ..................................................................................................................................................... 7 Level of satisfaction..................................................................................................................................................... 8 Information resources .............................................................................................................................................. 9 Library services ...................................................................................................................................................... 11 Facilities and equipment ........................................................................................................................................ 13 Library staff ............................................................................................................................................................ 15 Communication and promotion ............................................................................................................................. 17 Overall satisfaction................................................................................................................................................. 19 Frequency and Purposes of Library Visits ............................................................................................................. 21 Purposes of a library visit ...................................................................................................................................... 22 IMPROVEMENT ........................................................................................................................................................................... 24 FINDING ......................................................................................................................................................................................... 25 Means Score 2018-2025 ........................................................................................................................................ 25 Means Score for five categories 2018-2025 ......................................................................................................... 26 CONCLUSION ............................................................................................
ii LIST OF TABLES Table 1: List of 2025 Customer Satisfaction Survey Team SMNAL ............................................................................... 5 Table 2: Number of respondents according to Categories and Status............................................................................... 7 Table 3: A means score for sub-categories of Information Resources ............................................................................. 9 Table 4: A means score for sub-categories of Library Services .................................................................................... 11 Table 5: A Means Scores for Sub-Categories of Facilities & Equipment ..................................................................... 13 Table 6: A means scores for sub-categories of Library Staff ......................................................................................... 15 Table 7: A Means Score for Sub-Categories of Communication & Promotion............................................................. 17 Table 8: Open-ended answers for Improvement from respondents ............................................................................... 24 Table 9: Means Score for five categories 2018-2025 .................................................................................................... 26
iii LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: Number of respondents based on Gender .......................................................................................................... 8 Figure 2: Number of respondents based on Nationality.................................................................................................... 8 Figure 3: A means score for sub-categories of Information Resources ............................................................................ 9 Figure 4: Overall Means Score for Sub-categories mean score for Information Resources 2022-2025 ........................ 10 Figure 5: A means scores for sub-categories of Library Services.................................................................................. 11 Figure 6: Overall mean score for Sub-categories means score for Library Services ..................................................... 12 Figure 7: A Means Scores for Sub-Categories of Facilities & Equipment .................................................................... 13 Figure 8: Overall mean score for Sub-Categories of Facilities & Equipment ............................................................... 14 Figure 9: A means scores for sub-categories of Library Staff ....................................................................................... 15 Figure 10: Overall means scores for sub-categories of Library Staff ............................................................................ 16 Figure 11: A means scores for sub-categories of Communication & Promotion .......................................................... 17 Figure 12: Overall means scores for sub-categories of Communication & Promotion ................................................. 18 Figure 13: A Means Score for Overall Satisfaction Level ............................................................................................. 19 Figure 14: Overall Score means for five categories ....................................................................................................... 20 Figure 15: Frequency of Library Visit ........................................................................................................................... 21 Figure 16: Purposes of Library Visit.............................................................................................................................. 22 Figure 17: Overall Purposes of Library Visit................................................................................................................. 23 Figure 18: Overall Means 2018-2025 ............................................................................................................................ 26
4 INTRODUCTION The report provided an analysis of the Library Customer Satisfaction Survey (CSS), which was conducted to evaluate the level of customer satisfaction and to identify areas for improvement. The survey functions as an important instrument for understanding the perceptions and experiences of library users, offering valuable insights that are essential for enhancing library services. The report presented a comprehensive overview of the survey findings, including satisfaction levels across five key categories; i) Information Resources, ii) Facilities and Equipment, iii) Library Staff, iv) Library Services, and v) Communication & Promotion. Through analysis of the survey, it aimed to support informed decision-making, prioritise improvement initiatives, and promote effective communication between library management and its users. The analysis contributed to the library’s continuous commitment to delivering and sustaining high-quality services and ensuring customer satisfaction. The report focused on a survey conducted at Syed Muhammad Naquib al-Attas library, KL Campus. The population of this library consists of 188 registered members, as recorded in KOHA, the Library Management System (LMS). Background The Dar al-Hikmah Library has consistently placed a strong emphasis on delivering high-quality services to its clients since its establishment, positioning itself as a user-centred institution committed to excellence. The library continuously strives to enhance its service offerings across all key areas where the Customer Satisfaction Survey serves as a key performance indicator of the library. This initiative reflects the library’s dedication to maintaining service standards, ensuring accountability, and aligning its services with the evolving needs and expectations of its diverse user community. Since 2008, the library has conducted the survey on a biennial basis, providing a structured platform for users to share their feedback, experiences, ideas, and suggestions. This regular engagement enables the library to monitor trends in user satisfaction, identify strengths, and address areas requiring improvement in a timely and strategic manner. The presented report offers a comprehensive analysis of the survey findings, highlighting critical insights into user perceptions and experiences. It also outlined practical recommendations aimed at further enhancing customer satisfaction, strengthening service delivery, and supporting the library’s ongoing commitment to continuous improvement and excellence. Objectives The survey aims to achieve the following objectives: i. Identify areas for improvement in five categories: information resources, services, facilities & equipment, library staff, and communication and promotion. ii. Measure and monitor the library's performance over time. iii. Enable clients to provide feedback for the enhancement of the five categories. iv. Facilitate open and honest communication between clients and the library management, providing clients with the opportunity to express their views openly.
5 Survey Team The survey team for the SMNA library (SMNAL) in 2025 is comprised of seven members, with the Chief Librarian serving as the team's advisor. The list of committee members is shown in Table 1 below: Table 1: List of 2025 Customer Satisfaction Survey Team SMNAL Team member Committee Nor Hasyimah Mustafa Advisor Siti Hawa Darus Coordinator Ahmad Zaki Rashid Report writing and editorial Ahmad Zaki Rashid, Fazli Omar Survey distribution and collection Ahmad Zaki Rashid Data compilation & SPSS Ahmad Zaki Rashid Graphic design & special task METHODOLOGY The 2025 Library Customer Satisfaction Survey utilised a structured questionnaire as the primary instrument for data collection. The survey was designed to obtain valuable feedback and insights from library users regarding their level of satisfaction with various aspects of the library, including information resources, services, facilities and equipment, library staff, and communication and promotional. The methodologies applied in conducting this survey are outlined and discussed in the following paragraphs. Questionnaire Design: The questionnaire was developed to evaluate five key categories of customer satisfaction, namely: i) information resources, ii) services, iii) facilities and equipment, iv) library staff, and v) communication and promotion. The instrument incorporated both closed-ended and open-ended questions to facilitate the collection of quantitative and qualitative data, enabling a more holistic assessment of user satisfaction. The questionnaire has been revised in comparison with the 2024 survey to better reflect the current range of services offered. These revisions included the addition of response options to ensure alignment with existing library services. The questionnaire was organised into two main sections: Part One focuses on respondents’ demographic information, while Part Two assesses satisfaction levels across the five categories; Information Resources, Library Services, Facilities and Equipment, Library Staff, and Communication and Promotion. In addition, the questionnaire included items related to frequency of visits, purpose of visits, and overall satisfaction. Part Two also features an open-ended question to encourage respondents to share their opinions and suggestions. Overall, the survey allowing respondents to provide comprehensive feedback on various aspects of the library. A sample of the questionnaire is provided in Appendix B.
6 Sampling Technique The random sampling technique was employed to provide all library users to participate in the survey. This approach involved selecting respondents at regular intervals from the population of library users across the respective campus, thereby reducing potential bias and enhancing the representativeness of the sample. To ensure an appropriate and balanced distribution of respondents, the Sample Size Calculator developed by Raosoft, Inc. was used to determine the required sample size (Appendix A). In this survey, the recommended sample size was 64 respondents drawn from a total population of 188 registered library users, ensuring that the selected sample would accurately represent the characteristics of the overall population. Notably, a total of 79 respondents participated in the survey, exceeding the targeted sample size and thereby enhancing the reliability and robustness of the findings. Data Collection: The questionnaire was distributed to selected respondents, inviting them to provide feedback based on their experiences with the library through both online and physical approach. Additionally for the online distribution platforms such as the IIUM Community email, individual and group WhatsApp messages, and the Friends of the Library Club (FLIC), allowing for convenient access and completion. In addition, printed questionnaires were made available at designated locations, including General Reading Areas and library service counters, to accommodate users with limited access to digital platforms or a preference for manual submission. This dual approach aimed to maximise participation, ensure convenience, and promote inclusiveness by capturing feedback from a diverse range of library users. Data Analysis: Once the data collection phase was completed, all responses were compiled and prepared for analysis. Quantitative data derived from closed-ended questions were analysed using statistical techniques, specifically mean scores, to measure overall customer satisfaction levels. Meanwhile, qualitative data obtained from the open-ended question were systematically coded and analysed using a thematic approach to identify, themes and insights. The data analysis for the Customer Satisfaction Survey was conducted using SPSS (Statistical Package for the Social Sciences), a robust statistical software widely used for data analysis. The collected survey responses were imported into SPSS for examination, analysis, and interpretation to support meaningful conclusions. Descriptive statistics, including mean scores and frequency distributions, were employed to summarise the data, providing an overview of respondents’ satisfaction levels and the distribution of responses across various variables. Using SPSS, the library was able to generate valuable insights into customer satisfaction, identify key strengths and areas for improvement, and support evidence-based decision-making to enhance the overall library experience for its users.
7 Reporting The survey findings were compiled and presented in a comprehensive report, highlighting key insights, emerging trends, and practical recommendations. This report served as an important reference for library management in identifying areas of strength as well as aspects requiring improvement, thereby supporting evidence-based decision-making and strategic planning. By utilising a structured questionnaire as the primary data collection instrument and applying systematic random sampling through RAOSOFT, the 2025 Library Customer Satisfaction Survey ensured a systematic and representative evaluation of customer satisfaction levels. This approach enabled the collection of meaningful feedback and valuable insights, ultimately guiding continuous efforts to enhance library services and address the evolving needs of its users. Balanced Scorecard Target Commencing in 2025, the target mean score for all five survey categories was revised upward from 3.50 to 4.00 as part of the Library's continuous commitment to service excellence and customer satisfaction. This benchmark was established to ensure that customer satisfaction levels consistently exceeded the “Somewhat Satisfied” and “Satisfied” thresholds. By aiming for this target, the library demonstrated its commitment to continuous improvement and to surpassing user expectations, thereby delivering a high standard of service across all areas. RESULT Demographic result The 2025 Customer Satisfaction Survey was conducted to assess the level of satisfaction among library clients across five key categories: information resources, services, facilities and equipment, library staff, and communication and promotion. A total of 79 respondents participated in the survey, exceeding the target of 64 respondents. Table 2: Number of respondents according to Categories and Status Categories Full-time Part-Time Contract Total % Academic staff 6 0 0 6 7.59 Administrative staff 4 0 1 5 6.32 Postgraduate students 68 0 0 68 86.07 Undergraduate students 0 0 0 0 0 Foundation students 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 78 0 1 79 According to Table 2, the survey recorded a total of 79 respondents. The majority were postgraduate students, accounting for 68 individuals (86.07%). Academic staff comprised 6 respondents (7.59%), while administrative staff contributed 5 respondents (6.32%), including one on a contractual basis. No responses were received from undergraduate or foundation students. This distribution highlights the predominance of postgraduate participation, with comparatively smaller representation from academic and administrative staff. The survey results indicated that only ISTAC recorded responses, with a total of 73 respondents participating in the survey, while no responses were received from the other KCDIOs. This outcome is likely attributable to the scope and distribution approach of the
8 survey, which was primarily targeted towards the ISTAC community. As a result, awareness and participation were concentrated within ISTAC rather than being equally extended across all KCDIOs. In addition, the relatively limited level of interaction, collaboration, and day- to-day engagement between students from other KCDIOs and ISTAC may have reduced their exposure to the survey and consequently affected their participation rate. This situation suggests that respondents from outside ISTAC may not have perceived the survey as directly relevant to their academic environment or may not have received sufficient information and encouragement to participate. Therefore, the findings of the survey predominantly reflect the perspectives and experiences of the ISTAC community and may not fully represent the views of students across the wider KCDIO network. Future survey exercises may benefit from broader dissemination strategies and stronger engagement initiatives to ensure more balanced participation among all KCDIO communities. Gender Figure 1: Number of respondents based on Gender The gender distribution indicated that most respondents were female, comprising 51.8% (n=41), while 48.1% (n=38) were male. This suggests a slightly higher engagement among female participants in the survey. Nationality Figure 2: Number of respondents based on Nationality Out of 79 respondents, the majority were Malaysian with a total of 48 respondents (60.7%), while 31 respondents (39.2%) were International as illustrated in Figure 2. This indicated that the survey had significantly more participation received from local respondents. Level of satisfaction This section examined the outcomes regarding the mean score for five categories; i) Information 38 41 0 10 20 30 40 50 Male Female NUMBER OF RESPONDENT BASED ON GENDER 48 31 NATIONALITY OF RESPONDENTS Malaysian International
9 Resources, ii) Library Services, iii) Facilities and Equipment, iv) Library Staff, and v) Communication and Promotion. Information resources This category focused on assessing the quality, availability, and accessibility of the library's information resources, such as books, journals, databases, and digital collections. It explores the satisfaction levels regarding the range, relevance, and ease of access to these resources. There are five sub-categories for Information Resources, which are: i. Q1- Required and recommended references as listed in the Course Outlines meet my learning and research needs. ii. Q2- Printed resources (e.g. books, journals, staff etc.) meet my learning and research needs. iii. Q3- Online resources (e.g. online databases, e-books, e-thesis, e-journals etc.) meet my learning and research needs. iv. Q4- The information resources are current and relevant. Figure 3: A means score for sub-categories of Information Resources Table 3: A means score for sub-categories of Information Resources Respondents Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Means Academic staff 4.50 4.50 4.50 4.33 4.46 Administrative staff 4.80 4.40 4.60 4.80 4.65 Postgraduate students 4.84 4.85 4.79 4.85 4.83 Figure 3 and Table 3 shows that perceptions of the Information Resources sub-categories were highly positive across all respondent groups, with mean scores consistently exceeding the target mean score of 4.00. This indicates that the level of satisfaction and agreement towards the 4.5 4.8 4.84 4.5 4.4 4.85 4.5 4.6 4.79 4.33 4.8 4.85 4 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.6 4.7 4.8 4.9 Academic staff Administrative staff Postgraduate student A MEANS SCORE FOR SUB-CATEGORIES OF INFORMATION RESOURCES Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4
10 Information Resources was achieved across all categories of respondents. Postgraduate students recorded the highest overall mean score (4.83), reflecting the strongest level of satisfaction and agreement across all four questions, with particularly high ratings in Q2 and Q4 (both 4.85). Administrative staff reported the second-highest overall mean (4.65), demonstrating consistently favourable evaluations, with the highest scores observed in Q1 and Q4 (both 4.80). Academic staff recorded the lowest overall mean score among the groups (4.46); however, their responses remained well above the target benchmark, with equal ratings for Q1, Q2, and Q3 (4.50) and a slightly lower score for Q4 (4.33). Overall, the findings indicate that all respondent groups perceived the Information Resources positively, as every mean score surpassed the established target of 4.00, with postgraduate students expressing the highest level of satisfaction. Figure 4: Overall Means Score for Sub-categories mean score for Information Resources 2022-2025 Figure 4 presents the overall mean scores for four sub-categories of information resources: Q1 (Required and recommended references), Q2 (Printed resources), Q3 (Online resources), and Q4 (Currency and relevance of information resources) from 2022 to 2025. The data reveal a consistent upward trend across all categories, indicating continuous improvement in the quality, relevance, and accessibility of the library’s information resources. Throughout the four-year period, all mean scores remained well above the institutional target of 3.5, demonstrating strong performance and sustained user satisfaction. In 2022, the scores ranged between 4.22 and 4.32, already exceeding the benchmark significantly. By 2023, the figures rose further, reflecting enhanced resource provision and alignment with users’ learning and research needs. The 4.26 4.32 4.22 4.3 4.53 4.5 4.39 4.45 4.81 4.73 4.67 4.67 4.81 4.8 4.76 4.81 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 OVERALL MEANS SCORE FOR SUB-CATEGORIES OF INFORMATION RESOURCES 2022-2025 2022 2023 2024 2025
11 upward momentum continued in 2024, with mean scores between 4.67 and 4.81, and culminated in 2025 with the highest ratings recorded Q1 and Q4 both at 4.81, Q2 at 4.80, and Q3 at 4.76. This steady progression confirms that the institution has not only met but consistently surpassed its performance target. The results highlight effective management strategies, improved resource diversity, and a strong commitment to maintaining current and relevant materials. Overall, the findings affirm that the library’s initiatives have successfully strengthened its information resource offerings, ensuring continued excellence and high levels of user confidence. Library services This category evaluated the library's services consist of four sub-categories for Library Services, which are: i. Q1- Library Online Catalogue (OPAC) ii. Q2- Library skills classes iii. Q3- Library counters services iv. Q4- Reference or research inquiries The aims are to measure satisfaction with the efficiency, effectiveness, and helpfulness of the services provided by the library staff. Figure 5: A means scores for sub-categories of Library Services Table 4: A means score for sub-categories of Library Services Respondents Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Means Academic Staff 4.67 4.67 4.50 4.67 4.63 Administrative Staff 4.80 4.80 4.80 4.80 4.80 4.67 4.8 4.714.67 4.8 4.71 4.5 4.8 4.714.67 4.8 4.69 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 Academic staff Administrative staff Postgraduate students A MEANS SCORE FOR SUB-CATEGORIES OF LIBRARY SERVICES Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4
12 Postgraduate Students 4.71 4.71 4.71 4.69 4.70 Figure 5 and Table 4 present the mean scores for four sub-categories of library services Q1 (Library Online Catalogue/OPAC), Q2 (Library skills classes), Q3 (Library counter services), and Q4 (Reference or research inquiries) as evaluated by three respondent groups: academic staff, administrative staff, and postgraduate students. All mean scores are well above the institutional target of 3.5, indicating a high level of satisfaction with the library’s services across all user groups. Academic staff recorded an overall mean of 4.63, with slightly lower ratings for counter services (4.50) compared to other categories (4.67). Administrative staff provided the highest and most consistent ratings, with all sub-categories scoring 4.80, reflecting strong approval and confidence in the library’s service delivery. Postgraduate students also expressed high satisfaction, with mean scores ranging from 4.69 to 4.71, showing uniform appreciation for the library’s support in research and learning activities. Overall, the results demonstrate that the library’s services are performing exceptionally well, consistently exceeding the target benchmark. The findings highlight effective service provision, responsive support systems, and the library’s success in meeting the diverse needs of its academic community. Figure 6: Overall mean score for Sub-categories means score for Library Services Figure 6 illustrates the overall mean scores for four sub-categories of library services: Q1 (Library Online Catalogue/OPAC), Q2 (Library skills classes), Q3 (Library counter services), and Q4 (Reference or research inquiries) for the years 2024 and 2025. The results show consistently high performance across both years, reflecting strong user satisfaction and effective service delivery. In 2024, the mean scores ranged from 4.55 to 4.74, with the highest rating recorded for Q1 (4.74). In 2025, the scores remained stable or improved slightly, ranging from 4.70 to 4.71, showing continued excellence and consistency in service quality. Notably, Q2 and Q3 demonstrated improvement from 4.74 4.55 4.55 4.644.71 4.71 4.7 4.7 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 OVERALL MEAN SCORE FOR SUB-CATEGORIES OF LIBRARY SERVICES 2024 2025
13 4.55 in 2024 to 4.71 and 4.70 respectively in 2025, indicating enhanced engagement and support in library skills and counter services. Overall, the findings confirm that the library’s services have maintained high standards of accessibility, responsiveness, and relevance. The sustained performance across all categories highlights the institution’s commitment to continuous improvement and user-centred service excellence. Facilities and equipment This category assesses the physical facilities and equipment available within the library. The category consists of reading area, study rooms, computer lab, printing, and photocopying facilities, and WIFI access. It aims to gauge satisfaction with the comfort, convenience, and functionality of these resources. There are five sub-categories for Facilities and Equipment as follows: i. Q1- Reading area ii. Q2- Study rooms (Discussion/Carrel/Research rooms, etc.) iii. Q3- Computer Lab iv. Q4- WIFI access Figure 7: A Means Scores for Sub-Categories of Facilities & Equipment Table 5: A Means Scores for Sub-Categories of Facilities & Equipment Respondent Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Means Academic Staff 4.33 4.50 4.33 4.33 4.38 Administrative Staff 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.80 Postgraduate Students 4.37 4.35 4.01 4.31 4.26 4.33 4.8 4.37 4.5 4.8 4.354.33 4.8 4.01 4.33 4.8 4.31 3.6 3.8 4 4.2 4.4 4.6 4.8 5 Academic staff Administrative staff Postgraduate students A MEANS SCORE FOR SUB-CATEGORIES OF FACILITIES & EQUIPMENT Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4
14 Figure 7 and Table 5 present the mean scores for four sub-categories of library facilities and equipment for Q1 (Reading area), Q2 (Study rooms), Q3 (Computer lab), and Q4 (Wi-Fi access) as evaluated by academic staff, administrative staff, and postgraduate students. The results show consistently positive feedback across all respondent groups, reflecting satisfaction with the comfort, convenience, and functionality of the library’s physical resources. Academic staff recorded an overall mean of 4.38, with slightly higher satisfaction for study rooms (4.50) compared to other facilities (4.33). Administrative staff provided the highest and most consistent ratings, with all sub-categories scoring 4.80, indicating strong approval of the library’s facilities and equipment. Postgraduate students expressed moderate satisfaction, with mean scores ranging from 4.01 to 4.37, and a slightly lower rating for the computer lab (4.01), suggesting potential areas for improvement in technological support. Overall, the findings demonstrate that the library’s facilities and equipment are well-regarded by all user groups, particularly administrative staff. The results highlight the library’s success in providing a conducive environment for study and research, while also identifying opportunities to further enhance facilities for postgraduate users. Figure 8: Overall mean score for Sub-Categories of Facilities & Equipment Figure 8 illustrates the overall mean scores for four sub-categories of library facilities and equipment for Q1 (Reading area), Q2 (Study rooms), Q3 (Computer lab), and Q4 (Wi-Fi access) from 2022 to 2025. The data show steady progress and generally high satisfaction levels across all years, reflecting continuous improvement in the comfort, convenience, and functionality of the library’s physical resources. In 2022, the mean scores ranged from 3.37 to 4.46, with the lowest rating recorded for the computer lab (Q3). By 2023, all categories showed improvement, particularly Q3 and Q4, which rose to 4.23 and 4.31 respectively. The year 2024 marked the highest overall performance, with scores between 4.46 4.43 3.37 3.9 4.4 4.32 4.23 4.31 4.82 4.71 4.62 4.63 4.39 4.39 4.09 4.34 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 Q 1 Q 2 Q 3 Q 4 O V E R A L L M E A N S S C O R E F O R S U B - C A T E G O R I E S O F F A C I L I T I E S & E Q U I P M E N T 2 0 2 2 - 2 0 2 5 2022 2023 2024 2025
15 4.62 and 4.82, indicating significant enhancement in facilities and user experience. In 2025, the scores remained strong, ranging from 4.09 to 4.39, suggesting sustained satisfaction despite minor fluctuations. Overall, the findings demonstrate that the library’s facilities and equipment have consistently met user expectations, with notable progress in study areas and technological resources. The upward trend until 2024 highlights effective management and investment in infrastructure, while the stable results in 2025 confirm the library’s ongoing commitment to providing a comfortable and functional environment for learning and research. Library staff This category focuses on the interactions and assistance provided by the library staff. It examines respondents' satisfaction with the knowledge, professionalism, and responsiveness of the library staff members in addressing inquiries, giving guidance, and supporting clients in their information needs. The sub-categories for Library Staff are as follows: i. Q1- Library staff are professional, approachable, and friendly. ii. Q2- Library staff provide accurate answers to my inquiries. iii. Q3- Library staff are willing to assist and provide helpful information. Figure 9: A means scores for sub-categories of Library Staff Table 6: A means scores for sub-categories of Library Staff Respondents Q1 Q2 Q3 means Academic staff 4.5 4.5 4.67 4.56 Administrative staff 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.80 Postgraduate student 4.78 4.76 4.78 4.77 The figure 9 and Table 6 evaluates respondents’ satisfaction with the quality of services provided by library staff, particularly in terms of professionalism, approachability, responsiveness, and their ability 4.5 4.8 4.78 4.5 4.8 4.76 4.67 4.8 4.78 4.35 4.4 4.45 4.5 4.55 4.6 4.65 4.7 4.75 4.8 4.85 Academic staff Administartive staff Postgraduate students A MEANS SCORE FOR SUB-CATEGORIES OF LIBRARY STAFF Q1 Q2 Q3
16 to provide accurate and helpful assistance. Overall, the findings indicate a very high level of satisfaction with library staff across all respondent groups, with mean scores ranging from 4.56 to 4.80. Administrative staff recorded the highest level of satisfaction, achieving a perfect mean score of 4.80 across all three sub-categories. This demonstrates a consistently positive perception of library staff in terms of professionalism, accuracy, and helpfulness. Postgraduate students also expressed a high level of satisfaction, with mean scores of 4.78 for staff professionalism (Q1), 4.76 for the accuracy of responses (Q2), and 4.78 for willingness to assist (Q3), resulting in an overall mean score of 4.77. These findings suggest that postgraduate students highly value the support and guidance provided by library staff. Academic staff similarly reported favourable perceptions, with scores of 4.50 for both staff professionalism (Q1) and accuracy of responses (Q2), and 4.67 for willingness to assist and provide helpful information (Q3). The overall mean score of 4.56 indicates strong satisfaction with the quality of staff services. In conclusion, the Library Staff category achieved excellent ratings from all respondent groups. The consistently high scores reflect users’ confidence in the professionalism, knowledge, responsiveness, and helpfulness of library staff, highlighting their important role in delivering quality library services and enhancing the overall user experience. Figure 10: Overall means scores for sub-categories of Library Staff According to figure 10, the evaluation of library staff interactions and assistance from 2022 to 2025 shows a steady upward trend in respondents’ satisfaction. This category covers three sub-areas: professionalism, approachability, and friendliness (Q1); accuracy of responses to inquiries (Q2); and willingness to assist and provide helpful information (Q3). All scores remained well above the institutional benchmark of 3.5, reflecting consistent service quality. In detail, Q1 rose from 4.34 in 2022 to 4.42 in 2025, demonstrating sustained professionalism and approachability. Q2 improved from 4.31 to 4.49, highlighting greater accuracy and reliability in staff responses. Q3 increased from 4.33 to 4.48, showing enhanced dedication to assisting users and providing helpful guidance. These results suggest that staff development and continuous improvement initiatives have been effective. 4.38 4.4 4.414.4 4.38 4.44 4.86 4.89 4.85 4.76 4.75 4.77 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.6 4.7 4.8 4.9 5 Q1 Q2 Q3 OVERALL MEANS SCORES FOR SUB-CATEGORIES OF LIBRARY STAFF 2022-2025 2022 2023 2024 2025
17 Overall, the findings affirm the library staff’s commitment to service excellence, with consistent progress across all sub-categories. Their professionalism, responsiveness, and willingness to assist have contributed to a positive user experience and strengthened the library’s reputation for quality support. Communication and promotion This category evaluated the effectiveness of communication channels and strategies employed by the library. It assesses satisfaction with the clarity, informativeness, and timeliness of communication related to library services, updates, events, and promotions. This included feedback on the accessibility of information through the library's website, social media platforms, and other communication channels. There are four sub-categories for Communication and Promotion which are: i. Q1- Signages are clear and appropriate. ii. Q2- Library websites and social media are informative and interactive. iii. Q3- Updates on Library services, facilities, and activities are prompt. iv. Q4- Library exhibitions are enlightening and interesting. Figure 11: A means scores for sub-categories of Communication & Promotion Table 7: A Means Score for Sub-Categories of Communication & Promotion Respondents Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Means Academic Staff 4.33 4.0 4.17 4.33 4.21 Administrative Staff 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8 Postgraduate Students 4.78 4.81 4.79 4.72 4.78 4.33 4.8 4.78 4 4.8 4.81 4.17 4.8 4.79 4.33 4.8 4.72 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 Academic staff Administrative staff Postgraduate students A MEANS SCORE FOR SUB-CATEGORIES OF COMMUNICATION & PROMOTION Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4
18 The evaluation of the Communication and Promotion category highlights the effectiveness of the library’s communication channels and strategies in delivering clear, informative, and timely updates to its users. As indicate at Figure 11 and Table 7, the results show that all respondent groups recorded mean scores well above the institutional benchmark of 3.5, indicating strong satisfaction with the library’s communication efforts. Among the respondent groups, administrative staff rated all sub-categories equally high at 4.8, reflecting complete satisfaction with the clarity and accessibility of communication channels. Postgraduate students also expressed high satisfaction, with mean scores ranging from 4.72 to 4.81, suggesting that the library’s digital platforms and promotional activities effectively meet their information needs. In contrast, academic staff reported slightly lower but still positive scores, between 4.0 and 4.33, indicating room for improvement in enhancing engagement and interactivity through communication tools. Overall, the findings demonstrate that the library’s communication and promotion strategies are functioning effectively across all user groups. The consistently high ratings from administrative and postgraduate respondents affirm the success of the library’s outreach and information dissemination initiatives, while the moderate scores from academic staff highlight opportunities to further refine communication approaches to ensure inclusivity and sustained engagement. Figure 12: Overall means scores for sub-categories of Communication & Promotion The analysis of Figure 12 illustrates the overall mean scores for the sub-categories of Communication and Promotion from 2022 to 2025, reflecting steady improvement in respondents’ satisfaction with the library’s communication strategies. This category assesses the clarity, informativeness, and timeliness of communication related to library services, updates, events, and promotions, including accessibility through the website and social media platforms. Across all four sub-categories: signages (Q1), online communication (Q2), service updates (Q3), 4.35 4.25 4.23 4.3 4.34 4.3 4.32 4.3 4.84 4.63 4.6 4.68 4.75 4.75 4.75 4.7 3.9 4 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.6 4.7 4.8 4.9 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 OVERALL MEANS SCORE FOR SUB-CATEGORIES OF COMMUNICATION & PROMOTION 2022-2025 2022 2023 2024 2025
19 and exhibitions (Q4); the mean scores show a consistent upward trend. Q1 increased from 4.35 in 2022 to 4.75 in 2025, indicating clearer and more effective signages. Q2 rose from 4.25 to 4.75, highlighting improved informativeness and interactivity of digital platforms. Q3 advanced from 4.23 to 4.75, showing enhanced timeliness of updates, while Q4 grew from 4.30 to 4.70, reflecting greater engagement and interest in library exhibitions. Overall, the results demonstrate that the library has made significant progress in strengthening its communication and promotional efforts. The consistent rise in mean scores across all sub-categories suggests that initiatives to improve clarity, accessibility, and responsiveness have been successful, contributing to higher user satisfaction and more effective dissemination of information. Overall satisfaction Figure13: A Means Score for Overall Satisfaction Level Figure 13 illustrates the mean scores for overall satisfaction with the library among three respondent groups; academic staff, administrative staff, and postgraduate students from 2022 to 2025. All groups recorded mean scores well above the institutional benchmark of 3.5, reflecting consistently high satisfaction levels. Academic staff showed a steady improvement from 4.10 in 2022 to a peak of 5.00 in 2024, followed by a slight decline to 4.50 in 2025. Administrative staff demonstrated continuous growth, rising from 4.30 in 2022 to 4.80 in 2025, indicating sustained confidence in the library’s services. Postgraduate students maintained strong satisfaction throughout, increasing from 4.50 in 2022 to 4.97 in 2024, with a minor dip to 4.82 in 2025. Overall, the results reveal a positive upward trend in satisfaction across all respondent categories, particularly between 2022 and 2024. The slight decrease in 2025 suggests opportunities for the library to reinforce service quality and engagement strategies to maintain its high standards of user satisfaction. 4.1 4.3 4.5 4.28 4.57 4.46 5 4.7 4.97 4.5 4.8 4.82 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 Academic staff Administrative staff Postgraduate students A MEANS SCORE FOR OVERALL SATISFACTION LEVEL 2022-2025 2022 2023 2024 2025
20 In addition, the consistently high mean scores across all respondent categories highlight the library’s success in maintaining user satisfaction through effective service delivery and continuous improvement initiatives. The upward trend until 2024 suggests that enhancements in facilities, resources, and staff engagement were well received. Although a slight decline is observed in 2025, the overall performance remains commendable, indicating that the library has built a strong foundation of trust and reliability among its users. This sustained satisfaction reflects the institution’s commitment to quality and responsiveness to user needs. Figure 14: Overall Score means for five categories Figure 14 provides a comprehensive overview of the mean scores for five major categories; Information Resources, Library Services, Facilities & Equipment, Library Staff, and Communication & Promotion over a four-year period. The results demonstrate a consistent upward trend in satisfaction across all categories, with scores remaining well above the institutional benchmark of 3.5. This indicates that the library has successfully maintained high service quality and user confidence throughout the years. Information Resources improved steadily from 4.25 in 2022 to 4.79 in 2025, reflecting the library’s commitment to expanding and updating its collections to meet academic and research needs. Library Services also showed continuous progress, rising from 4.30 to 4.70, suggesting that enhancements in service delivery, user support, and accessibility were well received. Facilities & Equipment recorded the most significant improvement between 2022 (3.88) and 2024 (4.69), before a slight decline to 4.30 in 2025, possibly due to infrastructure maintenance or resource allocation challenges. Library Staff consistently achieved the highest satisfaction levels, peaking at 4.86 in 2024, underscoring their professionalism, approachability, and dedication to assisting users. Communication & Promotion also displayed positive growth, increasing from 4.28 to 4.73, which highlights the effectiveness of outreach initiatives and promotional activities in engaging the 4.25 4.3 3.88 4.47 4.28 4.47 4.49 4.37 4.48 4.44 4.7 4.6 4.69 4.86 4.68 4.79 4.7 4.3 4.76 4.73 I N F O R M A T I O N R E S O U R C E S L I B R A R Y S E R V I C X E S F A C I L I T I E S & E Q U I P M E N T L I B R A R Y S T A F F C O M M U N I C A T I O N & P R O M O T I O N O V E R A L L S C O R E M E A N S F O R F I V E C A T E G O R I E S 2 0 2 2 - 2 0 2 5 2022 2023 2024 2025
21 library community. Overall, the data reveal a strong and sustained pattern of improvement across all categories. The upward trajectory until 2024 reflects the library’s proactive approach to service enhancement, while the minor fluctuations in 2025 suggest areas for strategic review and reinforcement. These findings affirm the library’s role as a responsive and evolving institution that continues to prioritise user satisfaction, operational excellence, and community engagement. Furthermore, the consistently high scores across categories demonstrate the library’s holistic approach to service delivery, where improvements in resources, staff, and communication complement one another to create a well-rounded user experience. This synergy between different aspects of library operations ensures that users not only have access to quality materials but also benefit from supportive staff and effective communication channels. Looking ahead, the library can build upon these achievements by addressing the slight decline observed in 2025, particularly in Facilities & Equipment. Strategic investments in infrastructure, technology upgrades, and maintenance will help sustain user confidence and satisfaction. At the same time, continued emphasis on staff development and promotional initiatives will ensure that the library remains a dynamic and trusted hub for academic and research excellence. Frequency and Purposes of Library Visits The survey also examined the frequency and purposes of respondents’ visits to the library. The purpose is to gain insights into how often clients utilise library services and the factors that motivate their visits. Furthermore, identifying the purposes and frequency of the visits offers deeper insights into the diverse needs and interests of library users. These purposes include conducting research, borrowing materials, attending events or programs, accessing resources, seeking assistance from staff, or using the library as a quiet space for study or leisure. The detailed findings are presented in the following section. Figure 15: Frequency of Library Visit Figure 15 presented the frequency of library visits among clients in 2025. The survey results provide a comprehensive overview of how frequently different groups of respondents visit the 0 5 1 0 00 3 1 1 01 39 28 0 0 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 Daily Weekly Monthly Once per semester Never FREQUENCY OF LIBRARY VISIT Academic staff Administrative staff Postgraduate students
22 library and the underlying motivations for their visits. The findings indicate that postgraduate students are the most active users, with 39 respondents visiting weekly and 28 visiting monthly. This pattern reflects their strong reliance on the library for research, study, and access to academic resources. Their consistent engagement suggests that the library continues to serve as a crucial hub for postgraduate learning and scholarly activities. In comparison, academic staff demonstrate moderate engagement, with five respondents visiting weekly and one visiting monthly. Their visits are likely associated with specific academic tasks such as preparing teaching materials, conducting research, or supervising students. Meanwhile, administrative staff show relatively lower frequency, with three weekly visitors and one monthly visitor, indicating that their library use may be more task-oriented, such as accessing institutional documents or participating in administrative programmes. Daily visits are rare across all groups, and none of the respondents reported never visiting the library. This finding underscores that the library remains relevant and utilised by all categories of users, albeit at varying frequencies. Overall, the data highlight the library’s pivotal role in supporting postgraduate research and academic work, while also revealing opportunities to enhance engagement among staff members. Strengthening outreach initiatives, promoting specialised services, and organising targeted programmes could further encourage regular visits and optimise the library’s value as a dynamic academic resource centre. Purposes of a library visit In this survey, respondents were asked about the purpose of their visit to the library. There are six purposes provided in this survey, and respondents may select more than one answer. Figure 16: Purposes of Library Visit Figure 16 provided the purposes of library visits by the respondents. The survey results highlight the diverse reasons respondents visit the library, reflecting its multifaceted role in supporting academic, administrative, and research activities. Among the six purposes identified; classes, socialising, borrowing or returning books, events or programmes, assignments or research, and 4 4 0 1 1 53 4 0 1 0 4 42 47 1 8 11 39 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 PURPOSES OF LIBRARY VISIT Academic staff Administrative staff Postgraduate students
23 using library facilities; the data show that postgraduate students are the most active users across all categories. Their primary motivations include borrowing or returning books (47 respondents), completing assignments or conducting research (42 respondents), and using library facilities (39 respondents). These findings underscore the library’s importance as a central resource for postgraduate learning, research, and study. In contrast, academic staff and administrative staff demonstrate lower engagement levels, with modest participation in borrowing or returning books (four respondents each) and using facilities (five and four respondents respectively). Their visits are likely linked to specific academic or administrative tasks rather than regular study or research activities. Attendance for classes and events or programmes remains minimal across all groups, with only one postgraduate student attending classes and eight participating in events or programmes. Socialising within the library is relatively uncommon, though 11 postgraduate students indicated doing so, suggesting that the library also serves as a conducive environment for informal academic interaction. Overall, the findings reveal that the library primarily functions as a space for academic work, resource access, and research support, particularly for postgraduate students. The comparatively lower engagement among staff members suggests opportunities for the library to expand its outreach and tailor programmes that encourage broader participation. Initiatives such as collaborative workshops, resource-sharing sessions, and staff-oriented training could further enhance the library’s role as an inclusive academic and professional hub. Figure 17: Overall Purposes of Library Visit Figure 17 illustrates the overall distribution of library visit purposes among respondents, revealing that the library primarily serves as a centre for academic and research-related activities. The most common reasons for visiting are borrowing or returning books (55 respondents), completing assignments (49 respondents), and using library facilities (48 respondents). These findings indicate that the library continues to play a vital role in supporting users’ academic needs, offering essential 55 49 48 12 10 1 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 OVERALL PURPOSES OF LIBRARY VISIT
24 resources and spaces conducive to study and research. The high engagement in these categories reflects the library’s effectiveness in fulfilling its core educational and informational functions. Meanwhile, other purposes such as socialising (12 respondents) and attending events or programmes (10 respondents) show moderate participation, suggesting that the library also serves as a secondary venue for community interaction and institutional activities. Attendance for classes (1 respondent) is minimal, indicating that formal teaching sessions are rarely conducted within the library setting. Overall, the data emphasise that the library’s primary value lies in its academic support services, while its social and event-related roles remain supplementary. IMPROVEMENT The final open-ended question let respondents share suggestions for improvement. Their responses were reviewed and analysed to find common ideas and issues. Table 8: Open-ended answers for Improvement from respondents THEMES IMPROVEMENT POSITIVE RESPONSE INFORMATION RESOURCES 2 - LIBRARY SERVICES 1 2 FACILITIES & EQUIPMENT 1 - LIBRARY STAFF - - COMMUNICATION & PROMOTION - - TOTAL 4 2 Based on Table 8, the open-ended responses revealed several key areas for improvement and the corresponding actions taken by the library. Respondents highlighted the need for more journal subscriptions under the theme of Information Resources. While the library itself cannot directly subscribe to journals, the librarian will remind academic staff to submit requests for additional titles when necessary. This shows proactive engagement with faculty needs and a commitment to supporting research and teaching activities. Under Library Services, respondents raised concerns about inaccurate book return records, particularly for Arabic titles, and requested alerts for book renewals and returns to prevent unfair fines when systems malfunction. They also suggested rechecking books listed as available online but missing from shelves. In response, the library acknowledged that these issues stem from the unstable OPAC system (KOHA), which is currently under maintenance. The technical team is working to rectify system errors, and an inventory project is underway to verify the status of all books. Positive comments such as “Maintain good service” and “Good so far” indicate general satisfaction despite technical challenges. For Facilities and Equipment, respondents requested the installation of air-conditioning at the counter service area to improve comfort. The library promptly addressed this concern by
25 submitting a report to ISTAC Management, resulting in the successful installation of air- conditioning. This demonstrates responsiveness to user feedback and a commitment to enhancing the physical environment for both staff and patrons. No suggestions were recorded under Library Staff and Communication & Promotion, suggesting overall satisfaction with these aspects of library operations. In summary, the feedback reflects constructive engagement from users and a positive response from management. The main areas for improvement; resource expansion, system reliability, and facility comfort are being actively addressed, reinforcing the library’s dedication to continuous service enhancement and user satisfaction. FINDING The overall customer satisfaction findings for 2025 show a highly favourable perception of the library’s performance across all major service areas. Information Resources achieved the highest mean score of 4.79, reflecting strong appreciation for the quality and accessibility of academic materials. This suggests that users are satisfied with the library’s collection and its relevance to their research and learning needs. Library Staff followed closely with a mean score of 4.76, indicating that respondents value the professionalism, helpfulness, and responsiveness of the staff. Similarly, Communication and Promotion scored 4.73, showing that users recognise the effectiveness of the library’s outreach and information-sharing efforts. These results highlight the success of the library’s engagement strategies and staff commitment to service excellence. Library Services recorded a mean score of 4.70, demonstrating continued satisfaction with the range and reliability of services offered, including borrowing, reference assistance, and digital access. This consistent performance reflects the library’s ability to maintain high standards and meet user expectations. Although Facilities and Equipment received the lowest mean score of 4.30, it still remains above the institutional benchmark of 3.5, indicating general satisfaction with physical infrastructure. However, this area presents opportunities for improvement, particularly in enhancing comfort and accessibility. Overall, the findings affirm that the library continues to deliver quality services and maintain strong user confidence across all operational dimensions. Means Score 2018-2025 Initially, the target mean score for the Library Customer Satisfaction Survey was set at 3.00 on a 4-point Likert scale. In 2018, the Library Management revised the target and adopted a 5-point Likert scale, with the target mean score increased to 3.50. Effective from 2025, the target mean score was further raised to 4.00 and will remain in effect until otherwise directed by the Library Management.
26 Figure 18: Overall Means 2012-2025 Figure 18 illustrates the overall mean scores for library performance from 2018 to 2025, showing a clear upward trend in user satisfaction over time. The scores remained stable at 4.09 in 2018 and 2019, followed by a noticeable decline to 3.49 in 2020, likely reflecting the impact of pandemic-related disruptions. From 2022 onwards, the results demonstrate a steady recovery, with the mean rising to 4.23 and continuing to improve to 4.44 in 2023. This positive trajectory indicates successful efforts to restore and enhance library services, resources, and user engagement after the temporary setback. The highest score of 4.71 was recorded in 2024, marking the peak of overall satisfaction during the observed period. Although there was a slight decrease to 4.66 in 2025, the result still reflects strong user confidence and sustained service quality. Overall, the data reveal consistent improvement in library performance and user perception, with scores remaining well above the benchmark of 3.5. This trend underscores the library’s commitment to continuous enhancement and responsiveness to user needs across all operational years. Means Score for five categories 2018-2025 Table 9: Means Score for five categories 2018-2025 Categories 2018 2019 2020 2022 2023 2024 2025 Information Resources 4.00 3.87 3.32 4.25 4.46 4.71 4.79 Library Services 4.16 4.08 3.47 4.30 4.49 4.61 4.70 Facilities & Equipment 4.19 3.91 3.58 3.88 4.37 4.69 4.30 Library Staff 4.26 4.22 3.68 4.47 4.48 4.86 4.76 Communication 4.09 3.91 3.42 4.28 4.44 4.68 4.73 Table 9 provides a comprehensive analysis of the mean scores for five key categories of library 4.09 4.09 3.49 4.23 4.44 4.71 4.66 0 1 2 3 4 5 2018 2019 2020 2022 2023 2024 2025 OVERALL MEANS SCORE 2018-2025
27 performance; Information Resources, Library Services, Facilities and Equipment, Library Staff, and Communication & Promotion over the period from 2018 to 2025. The data reveal a clear trajectory of decline, recovery, and sustained improvement, reflecting both external challenges and the library’s proactive measures to enhance its services. The most significant dip occurred in 2020, when scores across all categories fell below previous levels, largely due to pandemic-related disruptions that limited access, strained resources, and affected user engagement. This decline was temporary, however, as subsequent years show a strong rebound beginning in 2022, with steady increases through 2025. Information Resources demonstrated the most remarkable growth, rising from a low of 3.32 in 2020 to 4.79 in 2025. This improvement underscores the library’s success in expanding journal subscriptions, strengthening digital collections, and ensuring that academic staff and students have access to relevant scholarly materials. Library Services also showed significant progress, increasing from 3.47 to 4.70 over the same period. This reflects enhancements in system reliability, borrowing processes, and user support, which collectively improved perceptions of fairness and efficiency. Facilities and Equipment followed a more moderate trajectory, peaking at 4.69 in 2024 before declining slightly to 4.30 in 2025. While this score remains above the institutional benchmark of 3.5, it suggests that further investment in infrastructure and environmental comfort is needed to sustain user satisfaction. Library Staff consistently achieved high ratings, rising from 3.68 in 2020 to 4.76 in 2025. This steady improvement highlights the professionalism, responsiveness, and dedication of staff members, who continue to be recognised as a cornerstone of user satisfaction. Communication and Promotion also improved markedly, increasing from 3.42 to 4.73. This reflects the effectiveness of outreach initiatives, promotional activities, and communication strategies that strengthened the library’s visibility and engagement with its community. Together, these results demonstrate the library’s holistic approach to service delivery, where improvements in resources, staff, and communication complement one another to create a well-rounded user experience. Overall, the findings from Table 9 confirm that the library has successfully navigated challenges and achieved substantial progress across all operational dimensions. By 2025, all categories exceeded the institutional benchmark of 3.5, affirming strong user confidence and satisfaction. The upward trend underscores the library’s commitment to continuous improvement, service excellence, and responsiveness to academic and user needs. While the slight decline in Facilities and Equipment highlights an area for strategic reinforcement, the overall trajectory is highly positive, positioning the library as a dynamic and trusted institution dedicated to supporting research, teaching, and community engagement. CONCLUSION The 2025 Customer Service Survey results demonstrate a highly favourable perception of the library’s performance across all major service categories. Information Resources achieved the highest satisfaction levels, with users recognising the breadth and accessibility of academic materials. This reflects the library’s success in strengthening its collections and ensuring that
28 resources remain relevant to the teaching, learning, and research needs of the university community. Library Staff also received consistently high ratings, highlighting their professionalism, responsiveness, and willingness to assist. Respondents expressed confidence in the accuracy of staff guidance and valued their approachable manner. Communication and Promotion similarly scored well, indicating that outreach strategies and information-sharing efforts have been effective in keeping users informed and engaged with library services. Together, these findings affirm the library’s strong reputation for service excellence and user support. Library Services recorded positive results, with users satisfied with borrowing, renewal, and digital access processes. While technical issues such as system reliability and book availability were noted in open-ended feedback, the overall scores confirm that users appreciate the range and reliability of services provided. Facilities and Equipment, although scoring lower than other categories, still exceeded the institutional benchmark. This suggests general satisfaction with infrastructure, while also pointing to opportunities for improvement in areas such as environmental comfort and accessibility. In conclusion, the 2025 survey affirms that the Syed Muhammad Naquib al-Attas Library continues to deliver quality services and maintain strong user confidence across all operational dimensions. The upward trends in satisfaction reflect the library’s commitment to continuous improvement, responsiveness to user needs, and dedication to supporting academic excellence. Addressing the identified areas for enhancement particularly facilities and system reliability will further strengthen the library’s role as a trusted and dynamic centre for knowledge, research, and community engagement.
29 APPENDIX A SAMPLE SIZE CALCULATOR BY RAOSOFT, INC.
30 APPENDIX B CUSTOMER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2025 Congratulations on being the respondent to the survey. The Dar al-Hikmah Library, IIUM conducts this survey annually to assess the library customers’ level of satisfaction with the library services, resources, and facilities at the campus libraries. Please take a moment to complete this questionnaire. We will make sure that your participation is anonymous. Collected data will only be accessible to the library researchers conducting the survey. We appreciate your cooperation. Thank you. 1. Status: Ο Full time Ο Part-time Ο Contract basis 2. Category: Ο Academic Staff Ο Administrative Staff Ο Postgraduate Student Ο Undergraduate Student Ο Foundation Student 3. Kulliyyah/Centre/ Institute/Office: Ο AIKOL Ο KAED Ο KAHS Ο KON Ο INHART Ο AHAS KIRKHS Ο KOED Ο KICT Ο KOM Ο KOD Ο CELPAD Ο PLANETIIUM Ο KENMS Ο KOE Ο IIiBF Ο ISTAC Ο KOP Ο KOS Ο KSTCL Ο CFS Ο SASMEC Ο Others: Ο IIUM ACADEMY 4. 5. 6. Campus: Gender: Nationality: Ο Gombak Ο Male Ο Malaysian Ο Kuantan Ο Female Ο International Ο Gambang Ο Pagoh Ο Kuala Lumpur PART 2 – Please indicate how satisfied you are with the library A. INFORMATION RESOURCES To what extent are you satisfied with the following information resources: Very Dissatisfied Dissatisfied Somewhat Satisfied Satisfied Very Satisfied 1. Required and recommended references as listed in the Course Outlines meet my learning and research needs Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο 2. Printed resources (e.g. books, journals, etc.) meet my learning and research needs Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο 3. Online resources (e.g. online databases, e-books, e-thesis, e- journals etc.) meet my learning and research needs Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο 4. The information resources are current and relevant Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο B. SERVICES To what extent are you satisfied with the following services: Very Dissatisfied Dissatisfied Somewhat Satisfied Satisfied Very Satisfied 1. Library Online Catalog Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο 2. Library Skills Classes Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο 3. Library counters services Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο 4. Reference or research enquiries Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο PART 1 – Please choose your background information
31 C. FACILITIES & EQUIPMENT To what extent are you satisfied with the following facilities & equipment: Very Dissatisfied Dissatisfied Somewhat Satisfied Satisfied Very Satisfied 1. Reading area Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο 2. Study rooms (Discussion/Carrel/Research rooms, etc.) Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο 3. Computer Lab Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο 4. WIFI access Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο D. LIBRARY STAFF Satisfaction with the helpfulness/timely/friendliness/convenience of the staff in dealing with library clients. Very Dissatisfied Dissatisfied Somewhat Satisfied Satisfied Very Satisfied 1. Library staff are professional, approachable and friendly Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο 2. Library staff provide accurate answers to my enquiries Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο 3. Library staff are willing to assist and provide helpful information Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο E. COMMUNICATION AND PROMOTION Satisfaction with how information is communicated (medium/speed/language used, etc.) Very Dissatisfied Dissatisfied Somewhat Satisfied Satisfied Very Satisfied 1. Signage is clear and appropriate Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο 2. Library website and social media are informative and interactive Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο 3. Updates on Library services, facilities and activities are prompt Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο 4. Library exhibitions are enlightening and interesting Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο F. How frequently do you visit the library? Ο Daily Ο Weekly Ο Monthly Ο Once per semester Ο Never G. What are your purposes for coming to the library? (You may select more than one answer) Ο Classes Ο Socializing Ο Borrowing/returning books Ο Events/Programmes Ο Assignment/Research Ο Using library facilities (e.g. Labs, internet, rooms, etc.) H. Overall, are you satisfied with the Library? Ο Very Dissatisfied Ο Dissatisfied Ο Somewhat Satisfied Ο Satisfied Ο Very Satisfied I. Any suggestion(s) to improve the library services? ___________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________ Thank you for taking the time to complete this questionnaire. If you have any inquiries, please contact the following: Dar al-Hikmah Library Gombak: 03-64214815 Syed Muhammad Naquib al-Attas Library: 03-64211260 Dar al-Hikmah Library Kuantan: 09-5704180 Dar al-Hikmah Library Centre for Foundation Studies: 09-5183480 Pagoh Campus Library: 06-9742425
32 APPENDIX C List of open-ended answers for Improvement according categories. 1. Information Resources No. Comments 1. More journal subscription required. 2. Library Services No Comments 1. Make sure the books are listed return instead of not being returned and fined. Some Arabic books have no record when you return them on the list. 2. Please consider the alert for return or renew books to be a part of the library service. This would help all if this is done instead of now when it is not. So, library can charge fines when the system is down. This is unfair for library users who have a lot of books to return or renew. Please help academic staff instead of punishing them with fines. We are one big family in this university. Thank-you. 3. Maintain good services 4. Good so far 5. Facilities and Equipment No Comments 1. No Air-condition at counter services area. Please do something
customer satisfaction survey report2025DAR AL-HIKMAH LIBRARY, CENTRE FOR FOUNDATION STUDIES, GAMBANG INTERNATIONAL ISLAMIC UNIVERSITY MALAYSIA prepared by: siti nor md idris head of client services, dAhl cfs 2025
2025 CUSTOMER SATISFACTION SURVEY REPORT DAR AL-HIKMAH LIBRARY CENTRE FOR FOUNDATION STUDIES, GAMBANG INTERNATIONAL ISLAMIC UNIVERSITY MALAYSIA Prepared by: SITI NOR MD. IDRIS HEAD OF CLIENT SERVICES, DAR AL-HIKMAH LIBRARY CENTRE FOR FOUNDATION STUDIES, GAMBANG 2026
1 TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES ii LIST OF FIGURES iii INTRODUCTION 4 Background 4 Objectives 4 Survey Team 5 METHODOLOGY 5 Questionnaire Design: 5 Sampling Technique 6 Data Collection: 6 Data Analysis: 6 Reporting 7 Balance Scorecard Target 7 RESULT 8 Demographic result 8 Level of satisfaction 9 Information resources 9 Library services 12 Facilities and equipment 13 Library staff 16 Communication and promotion 17 Overall satisfaction 20 Frequency and Purposes of Library Visits 22 Purposes of a library visit 23 IMPROVEMENT 25 FINDING 26 Means Score 2022-2025 26 Means Score for five categories 2022-2025 27 CONCLUSION 28 APPENDIX A 30 APPENDIX B 31 APPENDIX C 33
2 LIST OF TABLES Table 1: List of 2025 Customer Satisfaction Survey Team CFS Library 5 Table 2: Number of respondents according to Categories and Status 7 Table 3: A means score for sub-categories of Information Resources 10 Table 4: A means score for sub-categories of Library Services 12 Table 5: A Means Scores for Sub-Categories of Facilities & Equipment 14 Table 6: A means scores for sub-categories of Library Staff 16 Table 7: A Means Score for Sub-Categories of Communication & Promotion 18 Table 8: Open-ended answers for Improvement from respondents 25 Table 9: Means Score for five categories 2022-2025 27 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: Number of respondents based on Gender 8 Figure 2: Number of respondents based on Nationality 9 Figure 3: A means score for sub-categories of Information Resources 10 Figure 4: Overall Means Score for Sub-categories mean score for Information Resources 2022-2025 11 Figure 5: A means scores for sub-categories of Library Services 12 Figure 6: Overall mean score for Sub-categories means score for Library Services 13 Figure 7: A Means Scores for Sub-Categories of Facilities & Equipment 14 Figure 8: Overall mean score for Sub-Categories of Facilities & Equipment 15 Figure 9: A means scores for sub-categories of Library Staff 16 Figure 10: Overall mean scores for sub-categories of Library Staff 17 Figure 11: A means scores for sub-categories of Communication & Promotion 18 Figure 12: Overall means scores for sub-categories of Communication & Promotion 19 Figure 13: A Mean Score for Overall Satisfaction Level 20 Figure 14: Overall Score means for five categories 21 Figure 15: Frequency of Library Visit 22 Figure 16: Purposes of Library Visit 23 Figure 17: Overall Purposes of Library Visit 24 Figure 18: Overall Means 2022-2025 27
3 INTRODUCTION The report provides an analysis of the Library Customer Satisfaction Survey (CSS), which was conducted to evaluate the level of customer satisfaction and to identify areas for improvement. The survey functions as an important instrument for understanding the perceptions and experiences of library users, offering valuable insights that are essential for enhancing library services. The report presented a comprehensive overview of the survey findings, including satisfaction levels across five key categories: i) Information Resources, ii) Facilities and Equipment, iii) Library Staff, iv) Library Services, and v) Communication & Promotion. Through analysis of the survey, it aimed to support informed decision-making, prioritise improvement initiatives, and promote effective communication between library management and its users. The analysis contributed to the library’s continuous commitment to delivering and sustaining high-quality services and ensuring customer satisfaction. This report centres around the survey conducted at the Dar al-Hikmah Library, Centre for Foundation Studies, Gambang Campus (CFSL). The population of the CFSL amounts to 3,796 registered members, as recorded in KOHA, the Library Management System. Background The CFSL has consistently prioritised delivering high-quality services to its clients since its establishment. The library is deeply committed to ongoing improvements across all service areas. To ensure accountability and gauge performance, the library has adopted the Customer Satisfaction Survey as one of its key performance indicators since 2008 to gather valuable feedback from its clients, allowing their perspectives, ideas, and suggestions to shape its continuous improvement efforts. This report presents the comprehensive findings of the survey, highlighting important insights and recommendations for enhancing customer satisfaction and meeting the library's commitment to excellence. Objectives The survey aims to achieve the following objectives: 1. Identify areas for improvement in five (5) categories: information resources, services, facilities, staff, and communication. 2. Measure and monitor the library's performance over time.
4 3. Enable clients to provide feedback for enhancing the five categories. 4. Facilitate open and honest communication between clients and the library management, allowing clients to express their views openly. Survey Team The survey team for the Gambang campus in 2025 is comprised of sixteen (16) members, with the Chief Librarian serving as the team's advisor. The list of committee members is shown in Table 1 below: Table 1: List of 2025 Customer Satisfaction Survey Team CFS Library Team member Committee Nor Hasyimah Mustafa Advisor Siti Hawa Darus Coordinator Sahaniza Ibrahim, Siti Nor Md Idris Report writing and editorial Nadzirah Khairuddin, Zauyah Abd Ghani, Ahmad Aqil Syazwan Ahmad Yani, Ahmad Hisham Muda, Illika Awfiah Nabilah Suhaimi Survey distribution and collection Amira Syuhada Saiful Hizar, Fatin Nurhazwani Darus Data compilation & SPSS Hisyamuddin Ismail, Ahmad Rahimi Razali, Mohd Sharizal Hasan special task METHODOLOGY The 2025 Library Customer Satisfaction Survey utilised a structured questionnaire as the primary instrument for data collection. The survey was designed to obtain valuable feedback and insights from library users regarding their level of satisfaction with various aspects of the library, including information resources, services, facilities and equipment, library staff, and communication and promotional. The methodologies applied in conducting this survey are outlined and discussed in the following paragraphs. Questionnaire Design The questionnaire was developed to evaluate five key categories of customer satisfaction, namely: i) information resources, ii) services, iii) facilities and equipment, iv) library staff, and v) communication and promotion. The instrument incorporated both closed-ended and open-ended questions to facilitate the collection of quantitative and qualitative data, enabling a more holistic assessment of user satisfaction.
5 The questionnaire has been revised in comparison with the 2024 survey to better reflect the current range of services offered. These revisions included the addition of response options to ensure alignment with existing library services. The questionnaire was organised into two main sections: Part One focuses on respondents’ demographic information, while Part Two assesses satisfaction levels across the five categories: Information Resources, Library Services, Facilities and Equipment, Library Staff, and Communication and Promotion. In addition, the questionnaire included items related to frequency of visits, purpose of visits, and overall satisfaction. Part Two also features an open-ended question to encourage respondents to share their opinions and suggestions. Overall, the survey allowed respondents to provide comprehensive feedback on various aspects of the library. Sampling Technique The systematic random sampling technique was utilised to ensure equal opportunities for all library clients to participate in the survey. This method involved randomly selecting respondents from the population of library clients of the individual campus, thereby minimising bias and increasing the representativeness of the sample. To ensure a fair survey distribution, the Sample Size Calculator by Raosoft, Inc. was adopted to calculate the sample size of the population. The recommended sample size was 349 respondents. Systematic random sampling was utilised to select intended respondents from the 3,796 names in the population. Data Collection The questionnaire was distributed among the selected respondents, who were invited to provide their feedback based on their experiences with the library. The survey was conducted through various channels, including in-person distribution, online platforms, and email invitations, to maximise participation rates and convenience for the respondents. Two data collection methods were utilised to distribute the questionnaires. The first method involved distributing an online form through various channels, including the IIUM Community email, individual WhatsApp messages, and group WhatsApp conversations. This digital distribution approach allowed for convenient access and ease of completion for respondents who preferred online submissions. The second method involved distributing printed forms at designated locations, such as the General Reading Areas and library counters. By making physical copies available, the library ensured that clients who preferred or had limited access to online platforms could also participate in the survey. By implementing these two data collection methods, the library aimed to maximise participation
6 and gather feedback from a diverse range of clients, accommodating their preferences and ensuring inclusivity in the survey process. Data Analysis Once the data collection phase was completed, all responses were compiled and prepared for analysis. Quantitative data derived from closed-ended questions were analysed using statistical techniques, specifically mean scores, to measure overall customer satisfaction levels. Meanwhile, qualitative data obtained from the open-ended question were systematically coded and analysed using a thematic approach to identify themes and insights. The data analysis for the Customer Satisfaction Survey was conducted using SPSS (Statistical Package for the Social Sciences), a robust statistical software widely used for data analysis. The collected survey responses were imported into SPSS for examination, analysis, and interpretation to support meaningful conclusions. Descriptive statistics, including mean scores and frequency distributions, were employed to summarise the data, providing an overview of respondents’ satisfaction levels and the distribution of responses across various variables. Using SPSS, the library was able to generate valuable insights into customer satisfaction, identify key strengths and areas for improvement, and support evidence-based decision-making to enhance the overall library experience for its users. Reporting The survey findings were compiled and presented in a comprehensive report, highlighting key insights, emerging trends, and practical recommendations. This report served as an important reference for library management in identifying areas of strength as well as aspects requiring improvement, thereby supporting evidence-based decision-making and strategic planning. By utilising a structured questionnaire as the primary data collection instrument and applying systematic random sampling through RAOSOFT, the 2025 Library Customer Satisfaction Survey ensured a systematic and representative evaluation of customer satisfaction levels. This approach enabled the collection of meaningful feedback and valuable insights, ultimately guiding continuous efforts to enhance library services and address the evolving needs of its users. Balanced Scorecard Target Commencing in 2025, the target mean score for all five survey categories was revised upward from 3.50 to 4.00 as part of the Library's continuous commitment to service excellence and customer satisfaction. This benchmark was established to ensure that customer satisfaction levels
7 consistently exceeded the “Somewhat Satisfied” and “Satisfied” thresholds. By aiming for this target, the library demonstrated its commitment to continuous improvement and to surpassing user expectations, thereby delivering a high standard of service across all areas. RESULT Demographic result The 2025 Customer Satisfaction Survey was conducted to assess the level of satisfaction among library clients across five key categories: information resources, services, facilities and equipment, library staff, and communication and promotion. A total of 371 respondents participated in the survey, exceeding the target of 349 respondents. Table 2: Number of respondents according to Categories and Status Categories Full-time Part-Time Contract Total % Academic staff 6 1 1 8 2.15 Administrative staff 3 0 0 3 0.8 Foundation students 357 0 3 360 97.03 TOTAL 365 1 4 371 100 According to Table 2, the highest representation comes from CFS students, with 350 (97.03%) respondents indicating their active engagement and interest in the library. In contrast, the lowest representation is observed among academic staff, with only 8 respondents (2.15%), followed by administrative staff, with 3 respondents (0.80%), highlighting their relatively smaller involvement in the survey. A total of 371 respondents participated in the survey, and all of them came from the CFS (Centre for Foundation Studies). This means that 100% of the responses were from the CFS community, with no participation from other groups or categories.
8 Gender Figure 1: Number of respondents based on Gender The gender distribution indicated that most respondents were female, comprising 59.6% (n=221), while 40.4% (n=150) were male. This suggests a slightly higher engagement among female participants in the survey. Nationality Figure 2: Number of respondents based on Nationality Out of 371 respondents, the majority were Malaysian with a total of 368 respondents (99.2%), while 3 respondents (0.8%) were International, as illustrated in Figure 3. This indicated that the survey had significantly more participation from local respondents. Level of satisfaction
9 This section examined the outcomes regarding the mean score for five categories: i) Information Resources, ii) Library Services, iii) Facilities and Equipment, iv) Library Staff, and v) Communication and Promotion. Information resources This category focused on assessing the quality, availability, and accessibility of the library's information resources, such as books, journals, databases, and digital collections. It explores the satisfaction levels regarding the range, relevance, and ease of access to these resources. There are five sub-categories for Information Resources, which are: i. Q1- Required and recommended references as listed in the Course Outlines meet my learning and research needs. ii. Q2- Printed resources (e.g., books, journals, staff, etc.) meet my learning and research needs. iii. Q3- Online resources (e.g., online databases, e-books, e-theses, e-journals, etc.) meet my learning and research needs. iv. Q4- The information resources are current and relevant. Figure 3: A means score for sub-categories of Information Resources Table 3: A means score for sub-categories of Information Resources Respondents Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Means Academic staff 4.13 4.13 4.25 4.00 4.13 Administrative staff 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.33 4.08 Foundation students 4.24 4.34 4.31 4.26 4.29 Figure 3 and Table 3 present the statistical analysis of the library customer satisfaction survey for Information Resources. The findings show a generally high level of satisfaction across all
10 respondent groups, with overall mean scores ranging from 4.08 to 4.29. Among the groups, Foundation Students recorded the highest overall satisfaction, with a mean score of 4.29, and their highest rating was in Q2 (4.34), indicating strong approval of the information resources provided. Academic Staff followed with an overall mean of 4.13, reflecting positive but slightly lower satisfaction compared to students. Administrative Staff recorded an overall mean of 4.08, the lowest among the groups, although they showed strong appreciation in Q4 (4.33), which was their highest-rated item. Overall, the results indicate that Information Resources are well received by all user groups, with generally strong satisfaction across all evaluated areas. Figure 5: Overall Means Score for Sub-categories mean score for Information Resources 2022-2025 Figure 5 presents the mean satisfaction scores for four aspects of Information Resources from 2022 to 2025. The findings show consistently high satisfaction across all areas, with only small changes over time. In 2023, most aspects recorded their strongest performance. Printed resources (Q2) achieved the highest score, while Q1 and Q4 also showed similarly strong results, reflecting very positive user feedback during this year. In 2024, the scores remained stable, with a slight improvement in Online resources (Q3), which reached
11 its highest point, indicating better user experience with digital access. In 2025, satisfaction stayed positive across all areas. Printed resources (Q2) remained the highest-rated aspect, followed by Q4, while Q1 and Q3 showed slightly lower but still strong and balanced scores. The results indicate steady performance in Information Resources over the four-year period, with both printed and online resources maintaining positive user satisfaction. Library services This category evaluated the library's services, which consist of four sub-categories for Library Services, which are: i. Q1- Library Online Catalogue (OPAC) ii. Q2- Library skills classes iii. Q3- Library counters services iv. Q4- Reference or research inquiries The aims are to measure satisfaction with the efficiency, effectiveness, and helpfulness of the services provided by the library staff. Figure 6: A means scores for sub-categories of Library Services Table 4: A means score for sub-categories of Library Services Respondents Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Means Academic Staff 3.88 4.25 4.25 4.13 4.13 Administrative Staff 4.00 4.00 4.33 4.33 4.17
12 Foundation Students 4.29 4.29 4.51 4.31 4.35 Figure 6 and Table 4 present the mean satisfaction scores for the sub-categories of Library Services across three respondent groups. The findings show generally high satisfaction across all groups, with positive responses recorded in all service areas. Among the groups, Foundation Students reported the highest overall satisfaction with a mean score of 4.35, with their strongest response in Q3 (4.51), indicating strong approval of this service aspect. Administrative Staff followed with a mean score of 4.17, showing consistent satisfaction across most items, particularly in Q3 and Q4 (4.33), reflecting stable and positive service experiences. Academic Staff recorded the lowest overall mean score at 4.13. While their ratings for Q2 and Q3 (4.25) were positive, Q1 (3.88) was noticeably lower compared to other items, suggesting a relative area for improvement within this group’s experience. Overall, the results indicate that Library Services are well received across all user groups, with generally strong satisfaction, although some variation in specific service aspects suggests opportunities for targeted enhancement. Figure 7: Overall mean score for Sub-categories means score for Library Services Figure 7 presents a comparative analysis of the mean satisfaction scores for Library Services sub- categories between 2024 and 2025. The findings show a consistently high level of satisfaction across all service areas, with mostly stable performance and slight improvements in selected aspects.
13 Q3 remains the strongest-performing area in both years, increasing from 4.45 (2024) to 4.50 (2025). This reflects continued strong user approval of this aspect of library services. Q1 and Q2 show slight improvements, with both recording small increases from 2024 to 2025, indicating steady progress in user satisfaction for these services. In contrast, Q4 shows a minor decrease from 4.34 to 4.31, although it remains at a high and positive level, suggesting only a slight adjustment in user perception. Overall, the comparison shows that Library Services remain strong and stable, with small improvements in most areas and only minimal change in one category, reflecting consistent service quality across the two years. Facilities and equipment This category assesses the physical facilities and equipment available within the library. The category consists of reading area, study rooms, computer lab, printing and photocopying facilities, and WIFI access. It aims to gauge satisfaction with the comfort, convenience, and functionality of these resources. There are five sub-categories for Facilities and Equipment as follows: i. Q1- Reading area ii. Q2- Study rooms (Discussion/Carrel/Research rooms, etc.) iii. Q3- Computer Lab iv. Q4- WIFI access Figure 8: A Means Scores for Sub-Categories of Facilities & Equipment
14 Table 5: A Means Scores for Sub-Categories of Facilities & Equipment Respondent Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Means Academic Staff 4.38 4.00 4.13 4.63 4.28 Administrative Staff 4.33 4.33 4.33 4.33 4.33 Foundation Students 4.55 4.56 4.37 4.28 4.44 Figure 8 and Table 5 present the mean satisfaction scores for library facilities and equipment across different user groups. Overall, Foundation Students recorded the highest satisfaction level with a mean score of 4.44, followed by Administrative Staff (4.33) and Academic Staff (4.28), reflecting strong positive perceptions of the library’s facilities and equipment. Among the survey items, Q1 received the highest score from Foundation Students (4.55), indicating strong satisfaction with this aspect of the facilities. Academic Staff reported their highest satisfaction in Q4 (4.63), while Administrative Staff demonstrated consistent satisfaction across all items, each recording a mean score of 4.33. Although satisfaction levels were generally high across all items, Q2 among Academic Staff (4.00) recorded the lowest mean score, suggesting a potential area for further enhancement. Overall, the findings indicate that the library’s facilities and equipment effectively meet users’ needs and expectations, with all mean scores remaining well above the 4.00 benchmark, demonstrating a high level of user satisfaction across all respondent groups. Figure 9: Overall mean score for Sub-Categories of Facilities & Equipment
15 Figure 9 presents the overall mean satisfaction scores for the Facilities and Equipment sub- categories from 2022 to 2025. The findings show that the library has maintained consistently high satisfaction levels across all facility areas throughout the four-year period. Among the sub-categories, Q2 (Study rooms: discussion, carrel, and research rooms) recorded the strongest performance, achieving the highest score of 4.55 in both 2023 and 2025, indicating continued user appreciation for these learning spaces. Q1 (Reading area) also demonstrated a clear and steady improvement, increasing from 4.22 in 2022 to its highest score of 4.54 in 2025, reflecting growing user satisfaction with the reading environment. Meanwhile, Q3 and Q4 maintained stable and positive performance over the years, ending 2025 with favorable scores of 4.36 and 4.28, respectively. These results suggest that the library’s efforts in improving facilities and managing user spaces continue to positively influence user experience. Overall, the four-year trend highlights the library’s strong performance in providing quality facilities and equipment, particularly in study rooms and reading areas, where continuous improvements have contributed to increased user satisfaction. Library staff This category focuses on the interactions and assistance provided by the library staff. It examines respondents' satisfaction with the knowledge, professionalism, and responsiveness of library staff in addressing inquiries, providing guidance, and supporting clients with their information needs. The sub-categories for Library Staff are as follows: i. Q1- Library staff are professional, approachable, and friendly. ii. Q2- Library staff provide accurate answers to my inquiries. iii. Q3- Library staff are willing to assist and provide helpful information.
16 Figure 10: A means scores for sub-categories of Library Staff Table 6: A means scores for sub-categories of Library Staff Respondents Q1 Q2 Q3 means Academic staff 4.25 4.25 4.38 4.29 Administrative staff 4.33 4.33 4.33 4.33 Foundation students 4.47 4.48 4.53 4.49 Figure 10 and Table 6 present the satisfaction levels towards library staff across different user groups. The findings show consistently high satisfaction with staff performance, with overall mean scores ranging from 4.29 to 4.49. Foundation Students recorded the highest overall satisfaction score (4.49), followed by Administrative Staff (4.33) and Academic Staff (4.29). Among the survey items, Q3 (Staff efficiency, friendliness, and accuracy) received the highest ratings from both Foundation Students (4.53) and Academic Staff (4.38), reflecting strong appreciation for staff professionalism, helpfulness, and service quality. Administrative Staff demonstrated consistent satisfaction across all service areas, with an equal mean score of 4.33 for each item. Although Academic Staff recorded the lowest overall mean score among the respondent groups, their ratings remained positive across all evaluated aspects, indicating satisfaction with the support and responsiveness provided by library staff. Overall, the findings suggest that library staff are one of the library’s key strengths, particularly in delivering efficient, friendly, and reliable services to meet the needs of different user groups.
17 Figure 11: Overall mean scores for sub-categories of Library Staff Figure 11 presents the overall mean satisfaction scores for the Library Staff sub-categories from 2022 to 2025. The findings show consistently high satisfaction levels across all staff-related service areas over the four-year period. Among the items, Q3 recorded the highest performance, increasing from 4.37 in 2022 to 4.56 in 2023, and remaining strong in 2024 (4.51) and 2025 (4.52). This indicates continued positive user perceptions of staff efficiency, friendliness, and accuracy. Both Q1 and Q2 also demonstrated stable and favourable trends. Q1 improved from 4.36 in 2022 to 4.52 in 2023, before recording 4.45 in 2024 and 4.46 in 2025. Similarly, Q2 increased from 4.37 in 2022 to 4.51 in 2023, followed by consistently high scores in 2024 (4.46) and 2025 (4.48). Overall, the results indicate that library staff performance has remained consistently strong, with users expressing continued satisfaction with the quality, professionalism, and support provided by library staff. Communication and promotion This category evaluated the effectiveness of communication channels and strategies employed by the library. It assesses satisfaction with the clarity, informativeness, and timeliness of communication related to library services, updates, events, and promotions. This included feedback on the accessibility of information through the library's website, social media platforms, and other communication channels. There are four sub-categories for Communication and Promotion, which are:
18 i. Q1- Signages are clear and appropriate. ii. Q2- Library websites and social media are informative and interactive. iii. Q3- Updates on Library services, facilities, and activities are prompt. iv. Q4- Library exhibitions are enlightening and interesting. Figure 12: A means scores for sub-categories of Communication & Promotion Table 7: A Means Score for Sub-Categories of Communication & Promotion Respondents Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Means Academic Staff 4.50 4.13 4.25 4.25 4.28 Administrative Staff 4.33 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.08 Foundation students 4.44 4.34 4.40 4.41 4.40 Figure 12 and Table 7 present the satisfaction levels towards communication and promotion across different user groups. The findings show generally positive feedback, with all respondent groups recording favourable satisfaction scores. Foundation Students recorded the highest overall mean score (4.40), indicating positive and balanced satisfaction across all evaluated aspects. Academic Staff achieved an overall mean score of 4.28, with their highest rating given to Q1 (Library website and social media) at 4.50, showing strong appreciation for the library’s digital communication channels. However, Q2 (Promotional materials) received a slightly lower score of 4.13 from this group. Administrative Staff recorded the lowest overall mean score (4.08), although their responses
19 remained positive. They showed consistent ratings of 4.00 for promotional materials, orientations, and signage, while rating Q1 (Library website and social media) higher at 4.33. Overall, the findings indicate that the library’s communication and promotion efforts are well received, particularly through its website and social media platforms, with some room for improvement in promotional materials. Figure 13: Overall mean scores for sub-categories of Communication & Promotion Figure 13 presents the overall trend of satisfaction for communication and promotion from 2022 to 2025. The findings show a consistently positive pattern across all evaluated areas, with steady and slightly improving user satisfaction over time. Across the four sub-categories, most scores remain stable and consistently high throughout the period. There is a noticeable improvement from 2022 to 2023 across all items, where satisfaction levels generally moved from the low 4.2 range to around the mid 4.3 to 4.4 range. After that, the scores remain stable with only minor fluctuations, showing sustained performance. In particular, Q1 shows the strongest upward movement, improving over the period and reaching its highest point in the final year. Q3 and Q4 also show steady and consistent performance with small but continuous improvements. Q2 remains the most stable item, showing little variation across the four years.
20 Overall, the results indicate that communication and promotion services are consistently well received. The steady improvement in key areas, especially digital communication channels, reflects effective and ongoing enhancement of the library’s outreach and engagement efforts. Overall satisfaction In this survey, the respondents were also asked about their overall satisfaction with the library. Figure 14 below shows the results of the mean score for their overall satisfaction. Figure 14: A Mean Score for Overall Satisfaction Level Figure 14 presents the overall satisfaction ratings across the core user groups from 2022 to 2025, showing generally strong and sustained positive feedback across all categories. Overall, satisfaction levels remain high, with some variations observed between user groups and years. Among the groups, Academic Staff show an overall upward trend from 4.36 (2022), reaching a peak of 4.58 (2024) before declining to 4.22 (2025). This indicates an initial strong improvement followed by a noticeable decrease in the final year, suggesting the need for further attention to sustain satisfaction levels. Administrative Staff demonstrates a relatively stable pattern, with scores ranging from a high of 4.50 (2023) to 4.40 (2024) and 4.20 (2025). Although there is a slight downward trend after 2023, the ratings remain generally positive throughout the period. Meanwhile, Foundation Students show the most consistent trend, increasing from 4.26 (2022) to 4.40 (2023) and maintaining almost similar levels in 2024 (4.40) and 2025 (4.39). This reflects
21 steady and sustained satisfaction with library services among this group. Overall, the findings indicate that satisfaction remains strong across all user groups, with Foundation Students showing the most stable pattern, while Academic and Administrative Staff show some fluctuations that may require continued monitoring and improvement. Figure 15: Overall Score means for five categories Figure 15 presents the four-year overview of the five core library service categories, showing consistently high user satisfaction across all areas from 2022 to 2025, with only minor variations. Overall, Library Staff remains the highest-performing category, with scores staying strong from 4.53 (2022) and peaking at 4.55 (2023), before slightly decreasing to 4.37 (2025). Despite this small drop, it continues to lead all other categories. Facilities & Equipment shows steady improvement in the early years, rising from 4.29 (2022) to 4.49 (2023), before easing slightly to 4.35 (2025), reflecting stable satisfaction with facility enhancements. Library Services also improved from 4.30 (2022) to 4.46 (2024), before a small decline to 4.21 (2025), indicating a recent slight reduction but overall positive performance. Communication & Promotion increased gradually from 4.35 (2022) to 4.45 (2024), then dipped to 4.25 (2025), while still maintaining favourable feedback. Information Resources rose from 4.29 (2022) to 4.40 (2024), before decreasing to 4.16 (2025), suggesting an area that may need further attention. Overall, Figure 15 shows that all categories remain at a high level of satisfaction. Although there are small declines in 2025, the library continues to perform strongly, with Library Staff consistently being the top-rated category.
22 Frequency and Purposes of Library Visits The survey also examined the frequency and purposes of respondents’ visits to the library. The purpose is to gain insights into how often clients utilise library services and the factors that motivate their visits. Furthermore, identifying the purposes and frequency of the visits offers deeper insights into the diverse needs and interests of library users. These purposes include conducting research, borrowing materials, attending events or programs, accessing resources, seeking assistance from staff, or using the library as a quiet space for study or leisure. The detailed findings are presented in the following section. Figure 16: Frequency of Library Visit Figure 16 illustrates the frequency of library visits among users in 2025, showing clear differences in usage patterns across user groups. Overall, Foundation Students dominate library attendance, while Academic and Administrative Staff show much lower physical engagement. Among Foundation Students, library use is notably high, with the majority visiting monthly (78 respondents) and a strong number also attending daily (61 respondents). This indicates that the library continues to serve as an essential academic and study space for this group. In contrast, Academic Staff show very limited physical visits, with only 1 daily visitor, 2 weekly visitors, 3 monthly visitors, and 2 visiting once per semester. This suggests infrequent use of physical library spaces, possibly due to reliance on digital resources or alternative working arrangements. Similarly, Administrative Staff record the lowest engagement overall, with only 1
23 respondent visiting weekly and no reported daily or occasional semester visits, indicating minimal physical interaction with the library. The findings indicate that Foundation Students are the primary users of the physical library, while staff members use it much less frequently. This suggests a need to further investigate staff usage patterns and to assess whether the current services and digital access adequately meet their needs. Purposes of a library visit In this survey, respondents were asked about the purpose of their visit to the library. There are six purposes provided in this survey, and respondents may select more than one answer. Figure 17: Purposes of Library Visit Figure 17 presents the cross-tabulation of visit purposes, highlighting how different user groups utilise the physical library space. The findings show a clear dominance of Foundation Students in all categories of library use, while Academic and Administrative Staff contribute minimally to physical visits. Among Foundation Students, the library is mainly used for academic purposes, particularly for assignments and research (240 responses) and general facility use (209 responses). In addition, a notable number of students also visit for social interaction (102 responses), indicating that the library functions not only as a study space but also as a place for collaboration and peer engagement. In contrast, both staff groups show very low levels of physical engagement.
24 Academic Staff mainly visit for research or classes (4 responses), while Administrative Staff primarily use the library for general facilities (3 responses), with other purposes showing minimal or no activity. Overall, the data suggests that the library plays a central role as an academic and social space for students, while staff members rely more on non-physical or alternative channels for their needs. This highlights the continued importance of maintaining student-focused spaces, while also considering how staff engagement with the physical library can be further supported or enhanced. Figure 18: Overall Purposes of Library Visit As illustrated in Figure 18, the overall distribution of library visit purposes among users highlights distinct priorities, with core academic workflows serving as the primary drivers of physical traffic. Conducting assignments and research emerged as the leading motivation for utilising the library, capturing the largest individual share of user activity. This was closely followed by general library facility utilisation, which recorded 215 visits, and structured class attendance, which ranked third with 148 visits. While independent and structured academic tasks dominate the high-volume metrics, the library also functions significantly as a collaborative campus hub, drawing 104 visits explicitly for socialising activities. Conversely, specialised library engagement channels represented the smallest traffic segments, with attending organised events or programmes accounting for 47 visits and borrowing or returning books registering the lowest frequency at 40 visits.
25 In summary, the data show that the library is highly successful at balancing quiet academic work with collaborative student life. Independent assignments, research, and classes remain the primary drivers of physical visits, proving that the facility is essential to the core academic mission on campus. At the same time, the high number of visits for socializing underlines the library's evolution into a vibrant community hub. While traditional services like book borrowing and organized events see lower traffic volumes, they continue to provide important, specialized value to specific user segments. IMPROVEMENT The final open-ended question let respondents share suggestions for improvement. Their responses were reviewed and analysed to find common ideas and issues. As a result, five main themes were identified, matching the survey’s key categories. Table 8: Open-ended answers for Improvement from respondents THEMES IMPROVEMENT INFORMATION RESOURCES 10 LIBRARY SERVICES 24 FACILITIES & EQUIPMENT 67 LIBRARY STAFF 0 COMMUNICATION & PROMOTION 2 TOTAL 103 Table 8 presents the thematic analysis of open-ended survey responses, highlighting the main areas where users suggested improvements to the library. A total of 103 comments were grouped into five key themes based on the library’s core service areas. The most frequently mentioned theme was Facilities & Equipment, with 67 responses, representing the majority of feedback. This shows that users are mainly concerned with the quality and comfort of the physical environment. Common issues include study spaces, Musolla facilities, air-conditioning, seating arrangements, computer availability, Wi-Fi connectivity, signage, power outlets, and air ventilation, particularly related to dust and fungal concerns. Overall, users are not only focused on availability but also on the functionality, comfort, and condition of physical facilities.
26 Other themes received comparatively fewer mentions, indicating less concern in those areas. Notably, Library Staff received no improvement suggestions, which strongly reflects positive user perceptions of staff performance and service quality. In summary, the findings suggest that while service delivery by staff is highly satisfactory, the main area requiring attention is the physical infrastructure. The high proportion of feedback related to Facilities & Equipment clearly indicates that future improvement efforts should prioritise upgrading and maintaining the library’s physical environment to better meet user expectations. FINDING The overall customer satisfaction findings for 2025 indicate a favourable perception of library services across all key areas. Among the five categories assessed, Library Staff achieved the highest satisfaction score of 4.46, reflecting strong appreciation for staff professionalism, support, and overall service quality. Communication and Promotion ranked second with a score of 4.26, indicating the effectiveness of efforts in keeping users well-informed about library services, programmes, and available resources. Library Services also recorded a high level of satisfaction at 4.22, suggesting that the core services provided successfully meet user needs and expectations. Sustained excellence in study rooms and the continuous upward trajectory of reading area satisfaction reflect the highly successful impact of ongoing facility upgrades and effective space management. Means Score 2022-2025 The customer satisfaction data from 2022 to 2025 indicate a clear upward trend in overall satisfaction levels over time. A notable improvement is observed from earlier years, where the score increases to 3.96 and continues to strengthen, reaching above 4.00 by 2020 and maintaining this higher performance through 2025. Despite minor fluctuations between 2019 and 2024, where scores vary slightly, the overall pattern remains positive, culminating in the highest recorded score of 4.26 in 2025. This indicates that recent strategies and service improvements are effective in achieving and sustaining high satisfaction levels.
27 Figure 19: Overall Means 2022-2025 As shown in Figure 19, the overall satisfaction mean scores from 2022 to 2025 indicate a strong and steady upward trend. Across the four years, user satisfaction remains consistently high, reflecting sustained positive perceptions of library services. Although there are minor fluctuations between 2022 and 2024, these variations are relatively small and do not affect the overall upward movement. The trend becomes more clearly positive by 2025, where the highest recorded score of 4.26 is achieved, showing continued improvement in user satisfaction. This positive progression demonstrates that the library’s ongoing service improvements and enhancements have been effective in strengthening user satisfaction. It also reflects a more favourable perception of the library across all user groups, suggesting that continuous adjustments are successfully aligned with user needs and expectations. Overall, the long-term trend shows a clear shift towards higher satisfaction levels, highlighting the library’s consistent commitment to improving service quality, responsiveness, and user-centred support. Means Score for five categories 2022-2025 Table 9 presents the mean scores for the five satisfaction categories from 2022 to 2025, providing
28 a comprehensive overview of user perceptions across key aspects of the library. Table 9: Mean Scores for five categories 2022-2025 Table 9 shows the average satisfaction scores for the five main library service areas from 2022 to 2025. The results show a positive and steady improvement in user satisfaction across all categories. Library Staff remains the highest-rated area throughout the period, increasing from 4.32 (2022) to 4.48 (2025). This shows that users are very satisfied with staff service and support. Facilities & Equipment shows the most improvement, rising from 4.28 (2022) to 4.43 (2025), reflecting better physical facilities and recent upgrades. Communication & Promotion also improves steadily from 4.19 (2022) to 4.39 (2025), showing better communication and outreach over time. Library Services shows a gradual increase, reaching 4.34 (2025), while Information Resources stays fairly stable, ending at 4.28 (2025). Overall, the findings show that user satisfaction is improving across all areas. The library continues to perform well, with strong results especially in staff services and facilities. CONCLUSION The results of the Customer Satisfaction Survey 2025 show that the library continues to achieve a high level of user satisfaction across all main service areas. Over the 2022–2025 period, the results remain consistently strong, reflecting steady improvements in library services, facilities, communication, and information resources. Among all categories, Library Staff and Communication & Promotion received the highest ratings, showing that users are very satisfied with staff support, professionalism, and the library’s communication efforts. These areas continue to play an important role in creating a positive user Categories 2022 2023 2024 2025 Information Resources 4.21 4.34 4.30 4.28 Library Services 4.25 4.35 4.33 4.34 Facilities & Equipment 4.28 4.40 4.37 4.43 Library Staff 4.36 4.53 4.47 4.48 Communication & Promotion 4.24 4.37 4.36 4.39
29 experience. At the same time, Information Resources and Facilities & Equipment show slightly lower scores compared to other areas, suggesting that these are key areas for further improvement to better meet user needs. Overall, the findings show that the library is performing well and continues to improve over time. Moving forward, the focus should be on maintaining strong service quality while further enhancing resources and facilities to support users more effectively. APPENDIX A SAMPLE SIZE CALCULATOR BY RAOSOFT, INC.
30
31 APPENDIX B CUSTOMER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2025 Congratulations on being the respondent to the survey. The Dar al-Hikmah Library, IIUM conducts this survey annually to assess the library customers’ level of satisfaction with the library services, resources, and facilities at the campus libraries. Please take a moment to complete this questionnaire. We will make sure that your participation is anonymous. Collected data will only be accessible to the library researchers conducting the survey. We appreciate your cooperation. Thank you. 1. Status: Ο Full time Ο Part-time Ο Contract basis 2. Category: Ο Academic Staff Ο Administrative Staff Ο Postgraduate Student Ο Undergraduate Student Ο Foundation Student 3. Kulliyyah/Centre/ Institute/Office: Ο AIKOL Ο KAED Ο KAHS Ο KON Ο INHART Ο AHAS KIRKHS Ο KOED Ο KICT Ο KOM Ο KOD Ο CELPAD Ο PLANETIIUM Ο KENMS Ο KOE Ο IIiBF Ο ISTAC Ο KOP Ο KOS Ο KSTCL Ο CFS Ο SASMEC Ο Others: Ο IIUM ACADEMY 4. 5. 6. Campus: Gender: Nationality: Ο Gombak Ο Male Ο Malaysian Ο Kuantan Ο Female Ο International Ο Gambang Ο Pagoh Ο Kuala Lumpur PART 2 – Please indicate how satisfied you are with the library A. INFORMATION RESOURCES To what extent are you satisfied with the following information resources: Very Dissatisfied Dissatisfied Somewhat Satisfied Satisfied Very Satisfied 1. Required and recommended references as listed in the Course Outlines meet my learning and research needs Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο 2. Printed resources (e.g. books, journals, etc.) meet my learning and research needs Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο 3. Online resources (e.g. online databases, e-books, e-thesis, e- journals etc.) meet my learning and research needs Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο 4. The information resources are current and relevant Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο B. SERVICES To what extent are you satisfied with the following services: Very Dissatisfied Dissatisfied Somewhat Satisfied Satisfied Very Satisfied 1. Library Online Catalog Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο 2. Library Skills Classes Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο 3. Library counters services Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο 4. Reference or research enquiries Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο PART 1 – Please choose your background information
32 C. FACILITIES & EQUIPMENT To what extent are you satisfied with the following facilities & equipment: Very Dissatisfied Dissatisfied Somewhat Satisfied Satisfied Very Satisfied 1. Reading area Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο 2. Study rooms (Discussion/Carrel/Research rooms, etc.) Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο 3. Computer Lab Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο 4. WIFI access Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο D. LIBRARY STAFF Satisfaction with the helpfulness/timely/friendliness/convenience of the staff in dealing with library clients. Very Dissatisfied Dissatisfied Somewhat Satisfied Satisfied Very Satisfied 1. Library staff are professional, approachable and friendly Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο 2. Library staff provide accurate answers to my enquiries Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο 3. Library staff are willing to assist and provide helpful information Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο E. COMMUNICATION AND PROMOTION Satisfaction with how information is communicated (medium/speed/language used, etc.) Very Dissatisfied Dissatisfied Somewhat Satisfied Satisfied Very Satisfied 1. Signage is clear and appropriate Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο 2. Library website and social media are informative and interactive Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο 3. Updates on Library services, facilities and activities are prompt Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο 4. Library exhibitions are enlightening and interesting Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο F. How frequently do you visit the library? Ο Daily Ο Weekly Ο Monthly Ο Once per semester Ο Never G. What are your purposes for coming to the library? (You may select more than one answer) Ο Classes Ο Socializing Ο Borrowing/returning books Ο Events/Programmes Ο Assignment/Research Ο Using library facilities (e.g. Labs, internet, rooms, etc.) H. Overall, are you satisfied with the Library? Ο Very Dissatisfied Ο Dissatisfied Ο Somewhat Satisfied Ο Satisfied Ο Very Satisfied I. Any suggestion(s) to improve the library services? ___________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________ Thank you for taking the time to complete this questionnaire. If you have any inquiries, please contact the following: Dar al-Hikmah Library Gombak: 03-64214815 Syed Muhammad Naquib al-Attas Library: 03-64211260 Dar al-Hikmah Library Kuantan: 09-5704180 Dar al-Hikmah Library Centre for Foundation Studies: 09-5183480 Pagoh Campus Library: 06-9742425
33 APPENDIX C List of open-ended answers for Improvement according to five categories. 1. Information Resources No. Comments 1. add more new text book, easier for us to do research. 2. No,more new novels and manga books perhaps. 3. adding additional books such as language or history that would be interesting to other students so it can entile more students to get more knowledge and go to the library 4. Add more new books. 5. I think adding more no-fiction books that is not for research purpose is good. 6. the library should update its collection with newer academics titles and more fiction books to better support learning and leisure reading 8. 1)Bulletin board for update. (2) Poster for ways to access the library catalog/link. 9. Improve the resource to the latest one through out the generation. 10. Update physical resources 2. Services No Comments 1. in the website for online ref,saya student econ tak banyak website boleh rujuk 2. improve boorowing/returning process 3. allow snack in the library 4. MAKE A FOOD POINT 5. please open on sunday , longer during break 6. provide meals for student 7. provide meals for student 8. provide meals like snack for student. can help students fall asleep during study 9. Please let us bring our food,please. 10. Snacks are permissable 11. Enforcing 24 hours opened library system 12. add more interesting books 13. Make time longer. 14. please do organize activities that will help students to learn! 15. add eating area 16. clean the whiteboards in every room after every use 17. allow to bring food and drink 18. more cleaner 19 Extend the closing time sharp at 10:00pm not 9:30pm. 20 allow foods and drinks 21 IMPROVE THE LIBRARY WEBSITE INTERFACE. 22 24/7 library hours, library open on sunday, student staffs, robot staffs, i want o add my own advertisement on the walls 23 Create a telegram group to inform library operations daily 24 I have nothing to say in regard of improvising the library services. 15. Facilities and Equipment No Comments 1 can you help make more privacy for discussion room by providing curtain
34 2 Have carrel rooms with locked doors for us to leave behind things when going to the musolla or toilet. Applicable to Gambang Library. 3 MAYBE MORE CARREL ROOM AND PLUG AS WE USE LAPTOP 4 EVERYTHING IS OK BUT THE CHARGER POINT NEED TO BE ADDED MORE 5 OKAY JE. BUT PLEASE IMPROVE THE AC AT THE UPSTAIRS. ADD CHARGER PLUG 6 PROVIDE MARKER AND DUSTER IN EACH DISCUSSION ROOM.PROVIDE AT LEASE 2 DUSTBIN IN EACH FLOOR 7 "-provide stationery inside discussion room e.g : duster and marker" 8 improve wifi connection 9 have a coway machine for student to keep hydrated 10 Too cold 11 PROVIDE CURTAIN AT DISSCUSSION ROOM 12 More carell room or tables as it can get crowded sometimes. separate brothers and sisters space, making environment comfy. 13 GOOD WIFI PLEASE,THANK YOU 14 PROVIDE MORE DISSCUSSION ROOM,USUALLY FULL USE FOR ASSGMNT TO DISCUSS 15 Increase/widen musolla space 16 Widen the musolla. 17 Widen musolla space 18 Widen the musolla. 19 Better reading room. 20 Maybe can add projector into the discussion room. 21 Some MPR need renovations as it maybe small and crowded. 22 Provide whiteboard for all discussion room. 23 Provide all discussion rooms with whiteboard and markers. 24 Add more plug for charging. 25 REDUCE AIR COND LEVEL 26 reduce aircond temp 27 bigger musolla please 28 Inunder more toilet 29 Inclode more discussion room. 30 More discussion spaces 31 Sometimes, when I have a class in library the aircond does not work. 32 Of course,the wifi. 33 wifi slow. 34 Wifi slow. 35 Make disscussion room sound proof. 36 Discussion room can add sound proof wall because we can hear other voices from other discussion room. 37 Honestly,inred using discussion room and i thought it was sound proof but i was wrong and i'am being to loud,so p/s:if you could make them sound proof that would be lovely but if it to much,please don't be to mad when we being to lound. 38 Make discussion room soundproof. 39 provide duster for every whiteboard 40 whiteboard in all discussion room 41 lower aircond temp 42 add play station 43 the whiteborad marker can be change to brand new
35 44 add more plug point 45 increase air conditioning for second floor 46 wifi plz 67 47 improve wifi 48 improve wifi pls 49 please put a wall clock at musolla 50 please provide water dispenser 51 Improve the wifi 52 Reduce the temperature of air conditioner,always stay in the library for a long period of time 53 Lower town the air-conditioner temprature 54 If possible,i hope there is a carrel room where it is audio proof,where students can study especially recap the topics loudly in the individual room and it also increase privacy. 55 Add more discussion room. 56 Please repair your speaker because I couldn't hear it properly. 57 Firewall internet 58 Provide blinds at the discussion room, 59 Luaskan musolla, add more discussion room 60 Upgrade by adding more plug for student especially in discussion room. 61 fix and repair the plug around level 2 since some plug is wobly 62 Improvement Suggestions: Standardize book stoppers and implement window tinting to minimize corrosion issues and protect library resources from excessive sunlight. 63 adjustable aircond temparature in discussion room 64 PROVIDE WHITEBOARD MARKER FOR DISSCUSSION ROOM ADD MORE SITTING FOR LONER STUDY 65 Labelled the socket to ease the students to find it. 66 24/7 library hours, library open on sunday, student staffs, robot staffs, i want o add my own advertisement on the walls 16. Library Staff No Comments 1. 17. Communication No Comments 1. Collaboration event with other societies. 2. more reading program/contest.
customer satisfaction survey report2025SHARED FACILITIES LIBRARY, EDU HUB PAGOH PAGOH CAMPUS INTERNATIONAL ISLAMIC UNIVERSITY MALAYSIA prepared by: muhammad aiman basri learning support section 2025
2025 CUSTOMER SATISFACTION SURVEY REPORT SHARED-FACILITIES LIBRARY, EDU HUB PAGOH PAGOH CAMPUS INTERNATIONAL ISLAMIC UNIVERSITY MALAYSIA Prepared by: MUHAMMAD AIMAN BIN BASRI 2026
i TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES .............................................................................................................................................................................ii LIST OF FIGURES ..........................................................................................................................................................................iii INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................................................ 4 Background ................................................................................................................................................................. 4 Objectives..................................................................................................................................................................... 4 Survey Team ................................................................................................................................................................ 5 METHODOLOGY ........................................................................................................................................................................... 5 Questionnaire Design:................................................................................................................................................. 5 Sampling Technique ................................................................................................................................................... 6 Data Collection: ........................................................................................................................................................... 6 Data Analysis:.............................................................................................................................................................. 6 Reporting ..................................................................................................................................................................... 7 Balance Scorecard Target .......................................................................................................................................... 7 RESULT ............................................................................................................................................................................................ 7 Demographic result ..................................................................................................................................................... 7 Level of satisfaction..................................................................................................................................................... 8 Information resources .............................................................................................................................................. 8 Library services ...................................................................................................................................................... 10 Facilities and equipment ........................................................................................................................................ 12 Library staff ............................................................................................................................................................ 14 Communication and promotion ............................................................................................................................. 16 Overall satisfaction................................................................................................................................................. 19 Frequency and Purposes of Library Visits ............................................................................................................. 21 Purposes of a library visit ...................................................................................................................................... 22 IMPROVEMENT ........................................................................................................................................................................... 23 FINDING ......................................................................................................................................................................................... 24 Means Score 2012-2025 ........................................................................................................................................ 25 Means Score for five categories 2012-2025 ......................................................................................................... 26 CONCLUSION ............................................................................................
ii LIST OF TABLES Table 1: List of 2025 Customer Satisfaction Survey Team Shared Facilites Library....................................................... 5 Table 2: Number of respondents according to Categories and Status............................................................................... 9 Table 3: A means score for sub-categories of Information Resources ............................................................................. 9 Table 4: A means score for sub-categories of Library Services .................................................................................... 11 Table 5: A Means Scores for Sub-Categories of Facilities & Equipment ..................................................................... 13 Table 6: A means scores for sub-categories of Library Staff ......................................................................................... 15 Table 7: A Means Score for Sub-Categories of Communication & Promotion............................................................. 17 Table 8: Open-ended answers for Improvement from respondents ............................................................................... 23 Table 9: Means Score for five categories 2022-2025 .................................................................................................... 26
iii LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 Number of respondents based on Gender ........................................................................................................... 8 Figure 2 A means score for sub-categories of Information Resources ............................................................................. 9 Figure 3 Overall Means Score for Sub-categories mean score for Information Resources 2022-2025 ......................... 10 Figure 4 A means scores for sub-categories of Library Services .................................................................................. 11 Figure 5 Overall mean score for Sub-categories means score for Library Services ...................................................... 12 Figure 6 A Means Scores for Sub-Categories of Facilities & Equipment ..................................................................... 13 Figure 7 Overall mean score for Sub-Categories of Facilities & Equipment ................................................................ 14 Figure 8 A means scores for sub-categories of Library Staff ........................................................................................ 15 Figure 9 Overall means scores for sub-categories of Library Staff ............................................................................... 16 Figure 10 A means scores for sub-categories of Communication & Promotion ........................................................... 17 Figure 11 Overall means scores for sub-categories of Communication & Promotion .................................................. 18 Figure 12 A Means Score for Overall Satisfaction Level .............................................................................................. 19 Figure 13 Overall Score means for five categories ........................................................................................................ 20 Figure 14 Frequency of Library Visit ............................................................................................................................ 21 Figure 15 Purposes of Library Visit ............................................................................................................................... 22 Figure 16 Overall Purposes of Library Visit .................................................................................................................. 23 Figure 17 Overall Means 2022-2025 ............................................................................................................................. 25
4 INTRODUCTION The report provided an analysis of the Library Customer Satisfaction Survey (CSS), which was conducted to evaluate the level of customer satisfaction and to identify areas for improvement. The survey functions as an important instrument for understanding the perceptions and experiences of library users, offering valuable insights that are essential for enhancing library services. The report presented a comprehensive overview of the survey findings, including satisfaction levels across five key categories; i) Information Resources, ii) Facilities and Equipment, iii) Library Staff, iv) Library Services, and v) Communication & Promotion. Through analysis of the survey, it aimed to support informed decision-making, prioritise improvement initiatives, and promote effective communication between library management and its users. The analysis contributed to the library’s continuous commitment to delivering and sustaining high-quality services and ensuring customer satisfaction. The report focused on a survey conducted at the Shared Facilities Library, located on the Pagoh Campus. The total population of the library consisted of 314 registered members, as recorded in KOHA, the Library Management System (LMS). Background The Dar al-Hikmah Library has consistently placed a strong emphasis on delivering high-quality services to its clients since its establishment, positioning itself as a user-centred institution committed to excellence. The library continuously strives to enhance its service offerings across all key areas where the Customer Satisfaction Survey serves as a key performance indicator of the library. This initiative reflects the library’s dedication to maintaining service standards, ensuring accountability, and aligning its services with the evolving needs and expectations of its diverse user community. Since 2008, the library has conducted the survey on a biennial basis, providing a structured platform for users to share their feedback, experiences, ideas, and suggestions. This regular engagement enables the library to monitor trends in user satisfaction, identify strengths, and address areas requiring improvement in a timely and strategic manner. The presented report offers a comprehensive analysis of the survey findings, highlighting critical insights into user perceptions and experiences. It also outlined practical recommendations aimed at further enhancing customer satisfaction, strengthening service delivery, and supporting the library’s ongoing commitment to continuous improvement and excellence. Objectives The survey aims to achieve the following objectives: i. Identify areas for improvement in five categories: information resources, services, facilities & equipment, library staff, and communication and promotion. ii. Measure and monitor the library's performance over time. iii. Enable clients to provide feedback for the enhancement of the five categories. iv. Facilitate open and honest communication between clients and the library management, providing clients with the opportunity to express their views openly.
5 Survey Team The survey team for the M.K.H Library and IIiBF in 2025 is comprised of seven members, with the Chief Librarian serving as the team's advisor. The list of committee members is shown in Table 1 below: Table 1: List of 2025 Customer Satisfaction Survey Team Shared Facilities Library Team member Committee Nor Hasyimah Mustafa Advisor Siti Hawa Darus Coordinator Muhammad Aiman Basri Report writing and editorial Muhammad Aiman Basri, Muhammad Hazwan Hamdan Survey distribution and collection Muhammad Aiman Basri Data compilation & SPSS Suhani Surani Graphic design & special task Muhammad Aiman Basri, Muhammad Hazwan Hamdan CSS Publication & Promotion METHODOLOGY The 2025 Library Customer Satisfaction Survey utilised a structured questionnaire as the primary instrument for data collection. The survey was designed to obtain valuable feedback and insights from library users regarding their level of satisfaction with various aspects of the library, including information resources, services, facilities and equipment, library staff, and communication and promotional. The methodologies applied in conducting this survey are outlined and discussed in the following paragraphs. Questionnaire Design: The questionnaire was developed to evaluate five key categories of customer satisfaction, namely: i) information resources, ii) services, iii) facilities and equipment, iv) library staff, and v) communication and promotion. The instrument incorporated both closed-ended and open-ended questions to facilitate the collection of quantitative and qualitative data, enabling a more holistic assessment of user satisfaction. The questionnaire has been revised in comparison with the 2024 survey to better reflect the current range of services offered. These revisions included the addition of response options to ensure alignment with existing library services. The questionnaire was organised into two main sections: Part One focuses on respondents’ demographic information, while Part Two assesses satisfaction levels across the five categories; Information Resources, Library Services, Facilities and Equipment, Library Staff, and Communication and Promotion. In addition, the questionnaire included items related to frequency of visits, purpose of visits, and overall satisfaction. Part Two also features an open-ended question to encourage respondents to share their opinions and suggestions. Overall, the survey allowing respondents to provide comprehensive feedback on various aspects of the library. A sample of the questionnaire is provided in Appendix B.
6 Sampling Technique The random sampling technique was employed to provide all library users to participate in the survey. This approach involved selecting respondents at regular intervals from the population of library users across the respective campus, thereby reducing potential bias and enhancing the representativeness of the sample. To ensure an appropriate and balanced distribution of respondents, the Sample Size Calculator developed by Raosoft, Inc. was used to determine the required sample size (Appendix A). In this survey, the recommended sample size was 302 respondents drawn from a total population of 1,403 registered library users, ensuring that the selected sample would accurately represent the characteristics of the overall population. Notably, a total of 314 respondents participated in the survey, exceeding the targeted sample size and thereby enhancing the reliability and robustness of the findings. Data Collection: The questionnaire was distributed to selected respondents, inviting them to provide feedback based on their experiences with the library through both online and physical approach. Additionally for the online distribution platforms such as the IIUM Community email, individual and group WhatsApp messages, and the Friends of the Library Club (FLIC), allowing for convenient access and completion. In addition, printed questionnaires were made available at designated locations, including General Reading Areas and library service counters, to accommodate users with limited access to digital platforms or a preference for manual submission. This dual approach aimed to maximise participation, ensure convenience, and promote inclusiveness by capturing feedback from a diverse range of library users. Data Analysis: Once the data collection phase was completed, all responses were compiled and prepared for analysis. Quantitative data derived from closed-ended questions were analysed using statistical techniques, specifically mean scores, to measure overall customer satisfaction levels. Meanwhile, qualitative data obtained from the open-ended question were systematically coded and analysed using a thematic approach to identify, themes and insights. The data analysis for the Customer Satisfaction Survey was conducted using SPSS (Statistical Package for the Social Sciences), a robust statistical software widely used for data analysis. The collected survey responses were imported into SPSS for examination, analysis, and interpretation to support meaningful conclusions. Descriptive statistics, including mean scores and frequency distributions, were employed to summarise the data, providing an overview of respondents’ satisfaction levels and the distribution of responses across various variables. Using SPSS, the library was able to generate valuable insights into customer satisfaction, identify key strengths and areas for improvement, and support evidence-based decision-making to enhance the overall library experience for its users.
7 Reporting The survey findings were compiled and presented in a comprehensive report, highlighting key insights, emerging trends, and practical recommendations. This report served as an important reference for library management in identifying areas of strength as well as aspects requiring improvement, thereby supporting evidence-based decision-making and strategic planning. By utilising a structured questionnaire as the primary data collection instrument and applying systematic random sampling through RAOSOFT, the 2025 Library Customer Satisfaction Survey ensured a systematic and representative evaluation of customer satisfaction levels. This approach enabled the collection of meaningful feedback and valuable insights, ultimately guiding continuous efforts to enhance library services and address the evolving needs of its users. Balanced Scorecard Target Commencing in 2025, the target mean score for all five survey categories was revised upward from 3.50 to 4.00 as part of the Library's continuous commitment to service excellence and customer satisfaction. This benchmark was established to ensure that customer satisfaction levels consistently exceeded the “Somewhat Satisfied” and “Satisfied” thresholds. By aiming for this target, the library demonstrated its commitment to continuous improvement and to surpassing user expectations, thereby delivering a high standard of service across all areas. RESULT Demographic result The 2025 Customer Satisfaction Survey was conducted to assess the level of satisfaction among library clients across five key categories: information resources, services, facilities and equipment, library staff, and communication and promotion. A total of 314 respondents participated in the survey, exceeding the target of 302 respondents. Table 2: Number of respondents according to Categories and Status Categories Full-time Part-Time Contract Total % Undergraduate students 311 0 0 311 99.0 Postgraduate students 2 1 0 3 1.0 TOTAL 313 1 0 314 100 According to Table 2, the majority of respondents who participated in the survey were undergraduate students, with a total of 311 individuals (99.0%), while postgraduate students comprised only 3 respondents (1.0%). This indicates a high level of engagement and interest among undergraduate students toward the library and its services. All respondents involved in the survey were from the Kulliyyah of Sustainable Tourism & Contemporary Languages, the only Kulliyyah located at the IIUM Pagoh Campus.
8 Gender Figure 1: Number of respondents based on Gender The gender distribution indicated that most respondents were female, comprising 64.3% (n=202), while 35.7% (n=112) were male. This suggests a slightly higher engagement among female participants in the survey. Nationality Out of 314 respondents, all participants in the survey were Malaysian students, representing (100%) of the total respondents. This indicates that the survey participation was entirely contributed by local respondents. Level of satisfaction This section examined the outcomes regarding the mean score for five categories; i) Information Resources, ii) Library Services, iii) Facilities and Equipment, iv) Library Staff, and v) Communication and Promotion. Information resources This category focused on assessing the quality, availability, and accessibility of the library's information resources, such as books, journals, databases, and digital collections. It explores the satisfaction levels regarding the range, relevance, and ease of access to these resources. There are five sub-categories for Information Resources, which are: i. Q1- Required and recommended references as listed in the Course Outlines meet my learning and research needs. ii. Q2- Printed resources (e.g. books, journals, staff etc.) meet my learning and research needs. iii. Q3- Online resources (e.g. online databases, e-books, e-thesis, e-journals etc.) meet my learning and research needs. iv. Q4- The information resources are current and relevant. 35.7 64.3 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 Male Female NUMBER OF RESPONDENT BASED ON GENDER Gender
9 Figure 2: A means scores for sub-categories of Information Resources Table 3: A means scores for sub-categories of Information Resources Respondents Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Means Postgraduate students 4.67 5.00 5.00 4.67 4.83 Undergraduate students 4.57 4.55 4.56 4.56 4.56 Figure 2 and Table 3 present the statistical analysis of the library customer satisfaction survey for Information Resources, which indicated a very high level of satisfaction among respondents. The mean scores ranged from 4.56 to 4.83, all exceeding the acceptable benchmark of 4.00. Postgraduate students recorded the highest overall mean score (4.83), with exceptionally high satisfaction levels in Q2 and Q3 (5.00 respectively). This suggests that the information resources strongly met their learning and research needs. Meanwhile, undergraduate students also demonstrated a consistently high level of satisfaction, with an overall mean score of 4.56. Their responses across all items were relatively balanced, with mean scores ranging from 4.55 to 4.57, indicating positive perceptions toward both printed and online information resources provided by the library. Overall, the findings suggest that the library effectively meets users’ expectations in providing information resources to support learning and research activities. The consistently high mean scores across both respondent groups reflect strong satisfaction with the library’s collections and services. 4.67 4.57 5.00 4.55 5.00 4.56 4.67 4.56 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.6 4.7 4.8 4.9 5 5.1 Postgraduate Undergraduate A MEANS SCORE FOR SUB-CATEGORIES OF INFORMATION RESOURCES Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4
10 Figure 3: Overall Means Score for Sub-categories mean score for Information Resources 2022-2025 Figure 3 presents the overall mean satisfaction scores for the sub-categories of information resources from 2022 to 2025. Overall, the results indicate consistently high levels of user satisfaction across all four aspects throughout the four-year period, with all mean scores remaining above 3.90. In 2022, satisfaction levels were relatively high, with Q1 recording the highest mean score (4.42), followed by Q2 and Q4 (4.33 respectively), while Q3 recorded a slightly lower mean score of 4.29. However, in 2023, the mean scores declined across all categories, with Q1 and Q4 both recording 4.11, Q3 at 4.13, and Q2 at 4.12. A further decrease was observed in 2024, where Q1 dropped to 3.95, Q2 to 3.96, Q3 to 3.97, and Q4 slightly improved to 4.00. This trend suggests a decline in users’ satisfaction regarding the adequacy, relevance, and accessibility of the library’s information resources during that period. Nevertheless, a significant improvement was recorded in 2025, with all categories achieving their highest mean scores across the four years. Q1 recorded the highest score of 4.57, followed closely by Q3 and Q4 (4.56 respectively), while Q2 obtained 4.55. These findings indicate a high level of user satisfaction with the library’s printed and online resources, particularly in terms of adequacy, relevance, and support for learning and research needs. In summary, satisfaction with information resources fluctuated between 2022 and 2025, showing a gradual decline from 2022 to 2024 before improving substantially in 2025. Overall, the findings demonstrate that the library successfully enhanced the quality and effectiveness of its information resources over time. Library services This category evaluated the library's services consist of four sub-categories for Library Services, which are: i. Q1- Library Online Catalogue (OPAC) ii. Q2- Library skills classes 4.42 4.33 4.29 4.33 4.11 4.12 4.13 4.11 3.95 3.96 3.97 4.00 4.57 4.55 4.56 4.56 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 OVERALL MEANS SCORE FOR SUB-CATEGORIES MEAN SCORE FOR INFORMATION RESOURCES 2022-2025 2022 2023 2024 2025
11 iii. Q3- Library counters services iv. Q4- Reference or research inquiries The aims are to measure satisfaction with the efficiency, effectiveness, and helpfulness of the services provided by the library staff. Figure 4: A means scores for sub-categories of Library Services Table 2: A means score for sub-categories of Library Services Respondents Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Means Postgraduate Students 5.00 4.67 4.67 4.67 4.83 Undergraduate Students 4.56 4.56 4.57 4.57 4.57 Figure 4 and Table 4 present the mean satisfaction scores for the sub-categories of library services among postgraduate and undergraduate students. Overall, both respondent groups recorded very high levels of satisfaction, with all mean scores exceeding 4.50. Postgraduate students reported the highest overall satisfaction, with Q1 recording an excellent mean score of 5.00, indicating very strong satisfaction with the Library Online Catalogue (OPAC). Meanwhile, Q2, Q3, and Q4 each recorded mean scores of 4.67, reflecting consistently positive perceptions toward library skills classes, counter services, and reference or research inquiry support. Undergraduate students also demonstrated a high level of satisfaction across all sub-categories, with mean scores ranging from 4.56 to 4.57. Q3 and Q4 recorded the highest scores (4.57 respectively), indicating strong satisfaction with library counter services and reference or research inquiry assistance. Q1 and Q2 each recorded mean scores of 4.56, suggesting that undergraduate students were also highly satisfied with the OPAC and library skills classes provided by the library. Overall, the findings indicate that users were highly satisfied with the quality and effectiveness of the library services. The consistently high mean scores suggest that the library successfully meets users’ expectations in providing accessible, efficient, and supportive services for learning and research activities. 5.00 4.56 4.67 4.56 4.67 4.57 4.67 4.57 4.30 4.40 4.50 4.60 4.70 4.80 4.90 5.00 5.10 Postgraduate Undergraduate A MEANS SCORE FOR SUB-CATEGORIES OF LIBRARY SERVICE Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4
12 Figure 5: Overall mean score for Sub-categories means score for Library Services Figure 5 presents the overall mean scores for the sub-categories of library services from 2024 to 2025. Overall, the findings indicate a substantial improvement in user satisfaction across all service areas in 2025 compared to 2024, with all mean scores increasing from approximately 4.00 to above 4.50. In 2024, satisfaction levels were moderately high across all four sub-categories, with Q2 recording the highest mean score (4.09), followed by Q3 and Q4 (4.07 respectively), while Q1 recorded the lowest score at 4.06. These findings suggest that users were generally satisfied with the library services provided, particularly library skills classes and counter services. A significant improvement was observed in 2025, where Q1, Q3, and Q4 each recorded the highest mean scores of 4.57, while Q2 followed closely at 4.56. The increase in scores indicates stronger user satisfaction with the Library Online Catalogue (OPAC), library counter services, reference or research inquiries, and library skills classes. The consistently high mean scores demonstrate that users positively perceived the quality, accessibility, and effectiveness of the library services in supporting their learning and research activities. In summary, the overall satisfaction with library services improved considerably from 2024 to 2025. The findings suggest that the library successfully enhanced its service quality and user support, contributing to higher levels of user satisfaction across all evaluated aspects of library services. Facilities and equipment This category assesses the physical facilities and equipment available within the library. The category consists of reading area, study rooms, computer lab, printing, and photocopying facilities, and WIFI access. It aims to gauge satisfaction with the comfort, convenience, and functionality of these resources. There are five sub-categories for Facilities and Equipment as follows: i. Q1- Reading area ii. Q2- Study rooms (Discussion/Carrel/Research rooms, etc.) iii. Q3- Computer Lab 4.06 4.09 4.07 4.07 4.57 4.56 4.57 4.57 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 OVERALL MEAN SCORE FOR SUB-CATEGORIES OF LIBRARY SERVICES 2024-2025 2024 2025
13 iv. Q4- WIFI access Figure 6: A Means Scores for Sub-Categories of Facilities & Equipment Table 3: A Means Scores for Sub-Categories of Facilities & Equipment Respondent Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Means Postgraduate Students 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 Undergraduate Students 4.57 4.56 4.57 4.56 4.56 Figure 6 and Table 5 present the mean satisfaction scores for the sub-categories of facilities and equipment among postgraduate and undergraduate students. Overall, both respondent groups reported very high levels of satisfaction, with all mean scores exceeding 4.50. Postgraduate students recorded the highest level of satisfaction, with all four sub-categories achieving identical mean scores of 5.00. These findings indicate excellent satisfaction with the library’s reading areas, study rooms, computer labs, and Wi-Fi access. The results suggest that the facilities and equipment fully met the postgraduate students’ learning and research needs. Undergraduate students also demonstrated consistently high satisfaction across all sub-categories, with Q1 and Q3 recording the highest mean scores of 4.57 respectively, while Q2 and Q4 each obtained 4.56. These results reflect positive perceptions toward the quality, comfort, and accessibility of the library’s facilities and equipment, particularly the reading areas and computer lab facilities. Overall, the findings indicate that users were highly satisfied with the library’s facilities and equipment. The consistently high mean scores suggest that the library successfully provides a conducive and supportive environment for learning, study, and research activities. 5.00 4.57 5.00 4.56 5.00 4.57 5.00 4.56 4.30 4.40 4.50 4.60 4.70 4.80 4.90 5.00 5.10 Postgraduate Undergraduate A MEANS SCORE FOR SUB-CATEGORIES OF FACILITIES & EQUIPMENT Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4
14 Figure 7: Overall mean score for Sub-Categories of Facilities & Equipment Figure 7 presents the overall mean scores for the sub-categories of Facilities and Equipment from 2022 to 2025. Overall, the findings indicate fluctuating levels of user satisfaction from 2022 to 2024, followed by a substantial improvement across all sub-categories in 2025. In 2022, satisfaction levels were generally high for Q1 (4.28) and Q2 (4.16), while Q3 recorded a lower mean score of 3.75. Q4 (Wi-Fi access) received the lowest score at 3.28, indicating lower satisfaction with internet connectivity during that year. In 2023, slight declines were observed in Q1 and Q2, with mean scores decreasing to 4.00 and 3.99 respectively. However, Q3 and Q4 showed improvements, recording 3.94 and 3.94 respectively. In 2024, the mean scores remained relatively stable, with Q1, Q2, and Q3 each recording 3.91, while Q4 slightly decreased to 3.93. Although satisfaction levels remained acceptable, the findings suggest moderate perceptions toward the quality and accessibility of the facilities and equipment during this period. A significant improvement was observed in 2025, where all sub-categories achieved their highest mean scores across the four-year period. Q1 and Q3 recorded the highest scores of 4.57 respectively, while Q2 and Q4 each obtained 4.56. These findings indicate a very high level of satisfaction with the library’s reading areas, study rooms, computer labs, and Wi-Fi access. The substantial increase in mean scores suggests that improvements implemented by the library successfully enhanced the quality, comfort, and functionality of its facilities and equipment. In summary, satisfaction with library facilities and equipment fluctuated between 2022 and 2024 before improving considerably in 2025. Overall, the findings demonstrate that the library successfully strengthened its facilities and infrastructure to better support users’ learning, study, and research activities. Library staff This category focuses on the interactions and assistance provided by the library staff. It examines respondents' satisfaction with the knowledge, professionalism, and responsiveness of the library staff members in addressing inquiries, giving guidance, and supporting clients in their information needs. The sub-categories for Library Staff are as follows: 4.28 4.16 3.75 3.28 4.00 3.99 3.94 3.943.91 3.91 3.91 3.93 4.57 4.56 4.57 4.56 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 OVERALL MEAN SCORE FOR SUB-CATEGORIES OF FACILITIES & EQUIPMENT 2022-2025 2022 2023 2024 2025
15 i. Q1- Library staff are professional, approachable, and friendly. ii. Q2- Library staff provide accurate answers to my inquiries. iii. Q3- Library staff are willing to assist and provide helpful information. Figure 8: A means scores for sub-categories of Library Staff Table 4: A means scores for sub-categories of Library Staff Respondents Q1 Q2 Q3 means Postgraduate student 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 Undergraduate student 4.57 4.57 4.57 4.57 Figure 8 and Table 6 present the mean satisfaction scores for the sub-categories of library staff among postgraduate and undergraduate students. Overall, both respondent groups reported very high levels of satisfaction toward the library staff, with all mean scores exceeding 4.50. Postgraduate students recorded the highest level of satisfaction, with all three sub-categories achieving perfect mean scores of 5.00. These findings indicate excellent satisfaction with the professionalism, approachability, and friendliness of library staff, as well as the accuracy of responses and willingness to provide assistance and helpful information. Undergraduate students also demonstrated consistently high satisfaction, with all three sub- categories recording identical mean scores of 4.57. This suggests that undergraduate students positively perceived the quality of service provided by the library staff, particularly in terms of professionalism, responsiveness, and helpfulness in addressing users’ needs and inquiries. Overall, the findings indicate that users were highly satisfied with the performance and service quality of the library staff. The consistently high mean scores reflect the library staff’s effectiveness in providing professional, friendly, and supportive assistance to users in their learning and research activities. 5.00 4.57 5.00 4.57 5.00 4.57 4.30 4.40 4.50 4.60 4.70 4.80 4.90 5.00 5.10 Postgraduate Undergraduate A MEANS SCORE FOR SUB-CATEGORIES OF OF LIBRARY STAFF Q1 Q2 Q3
16 Figure 9: Overall means scores for sub-categories of Library Staff Figure 9 presents the overall mean scores for the sub-categories of library staff from 2022 to 2025. Overall, the findings indicate a consistently high level of user satisfaction toward library staff throughout the four-year period, with all mean scores remaining above 4.30, except for Q2 in 2024. In 2022, the mean scores recorded were 4.34 for Q1, 4.31 for Q2, and 4.33 for Q3, indicating positive perceptions toward the professionalism, accuracy, and helpfulness of library staff. Satisfaction levels increased in 2023, with Q1 recording 4.42, Q2 at 4.43, and Q3 achieving the highest score of 4.45. These findings suggest stronger user satisfaction with the quality of staff services and assistance provided during that year. In 2024, Q1 remained stable at 4.42, while Q3 recorded a slight decrease to 4.44. However, Q2 showed a noticeable decline to 3.91, indicating comparatively lower satisfaction regarding the accuracy of staff responses to user inquiries during that period. Despite this decline, the scores generally remained within a satisfactory range. A significant improvement was observed in 2025, where all three sub-categories recorded their highest mean scores across the four-year period. Q1, Q2, and Q3 each achieved a mean score of 4.58, reflecting a very high level of satisfaction with the professionalism, friendliness, responsiveness, and helpfulness of library staff. In summary, user satisfaction with library staff demonstrated an overall positive upward trend from 2022 to 2025, despite minor fluctuations in certain sub-categories. The substantial improvement in 2025 suggests that the library successfully enhanced the quality of staff services and user support, contributing to stronger positive perceptions among users. Communication and promotion This category evaluated the effectiveness of communication channels and strategies employed by the library. It assesses satisfaction with the clarity, informativeness, and timeliness of communication related to library services, updates, events, and promotions. This included 4.34 4.31 4.33 4.42 4.43 4.454.42 3.91 4.44 4.58 4.58 4.58 Q1 Q2 Q3 OVERALL MEAN SCORE FOR SUB-CATEGORIES OF LIBRARY STAFF 2022-2025 2022 2023 2024 2025
17 feedback on the accessibility of information through the library's website, social media platforms, and other communication channels. There are four sub-categories for Communication and Promotion which are: i. Q1- Signages are clear and appropriate. ii. Q2- Library websites and social media are informative and interactive. iii. Q3- Updates on Library services, facilities, and activities are prompt. iv. Q4- Library exhibitions are enlightening and interesting. Figure 10: A means scores for sub-categories of Communication & Promotion Table 5: A Means Score for Sub-Categories of Communication & Promotion Respondents Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Means Postgraduate Students 4.67 5.00 5.00 4.67 4.83 Undergraduate Students 4.57 4.57 4.57 4.57 4.57 Figure 10 and Table 7 present the mean satisfaction scores for the sub-categories of Communication and Promotion among postgraduate and undergraduate students. Overall, both respondent groups reported very high levels of satisfaction, with all mean scores exceeding 4.50. Postgraduate students recorded the highest level of satisfaction, particularly in Q2 and Q3, where both sub-categories achieved perfect mean scores of 5.00. This indicates excellent satisfaction with the library website and social media, as well as the promptness of updates regarding library services, facilities, and activities. Meanwhile, Q1 and Q4 each recorded mean scores of 4.67, reflecting strong satisfaction with the clarity of signages and the effectiveness of library exhibitions. Undergraduate students also demonstrated consistently high satisfaction across all four sub- categories, with identical mean scores of 4.57 for Q1, Q2, Q3, and Q4. These findings suggest that undergraduate students positively perceived the library’s communication channels, promotional activities, service updates, and informational support provided through signages, social media, and exhibitions. Overall, the findings indicate that users were highly satisfied with the library’s communication and promotional efforts. The consistently high mean scores demonstrate the effectiveness of the library’s strategies in delivering clear information, timely updates, and engaging promotional activities to support users’ learning and research needs. 4.67 4.57 5.00 4.57 5.00 4.57 4.67 4.57 4.30 4.40 4.50 4.60 4.70 4.80 4.90 5.00 5.10 Postgraduate Undergraduate A MEANS SCORE FOR SUB-CATEGORIES OF COMMUNICATION & PROMOTION Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4
18 Figure 11: Overall means scores for sub-categories of Communication & Promotion Figure 11 presents the overall mean scores for the sub-categories of Communication and Promotion from 2022 to 2025. Overall, the findings indicate a gradual improvement in user satisfaction across all four sub-categories throughout the four-year period, with the highest scores recorded in 2025. In 2022, the mean scores ranged from 4.14 to 4.24, with Q4 recording the highest score (4.24), followed by Q1 (4.22), Q2 (4.17), and Q3 (4.14). These findings indicate that users were generally satisfied with the library’s communication channels, promotional activities, and informational support. In 2023, slight improvements were observed in Q2 and Q3, which both recorded mean scores of 4.19 and 4.31 respectively, while Q1 and Q4 showed slight decreases to 4.18 and 4.23. Further improvements were recorded in 2024, where Q2 and Q3 each achieved mean scores of 4.31, while Q4 increased to 4.38, the highest score recorded for that year. Q1 also showed a positive increase to 4.30. These findings suggest that users were increasingly satisfied with the effectiveness of the library’s website, social media platforms, service updates, and promotional activities. A substantial improvement was observed in 2025, where Q2 and Q3 each achieved perfect mean scores of 5.00, indicating excellent satisfaction with the library website, social media, and prompt updates regarding library services and activities. Q1 and Q4 both recorded high mean scores of 4.67, reflecting strong satisfaction with the clarity of signages and the effectiveness of library exhibitions. In summary, satisfaction with communication and promotion showed a positive upward trend from 2022 to 2025, despite minor fluctuations in certain years. Overall, the findings demonstrate that the library successfully enhanced its communication strategies and promotional activities, contributing to stronger user engagement and satisfaction over time. 4.22 4.17 4.14 4.244.18 4.19 4.31 4.234.3 4.31 4.31 4.38 4.67 5.00 5.00 4.67 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 OVERALL MEAN SCORE FOR SUB-CATEGORIES OF COMMUNICATION & PROMOTION 2022-2025 2022 2023 2024 2025
19 Overall satisfaction Figure 12 presents the overall mean scores for user satisfaction with the library from 2022 to 2025 among postgraduate and undergraduate students. Overall, the findings indicate consistently high levels of satisfaction throughout the four-year period, with noticeable improvements recorded in 2025. Figure 12: A Means Score for Overall Satisfaction Level Postgraduate students recorded mean satisfaction scores of 4.18 in 2022, followed by slight decreases to 4.06 in both 2023 and 2024. However, a substantial improvement was observed in 2025, where the mean score increased to a perfect score of 5.00. This indicates an excellent level of satisfaction among postgraduate students toward the library’s overall services, facilities, and support for learning and research activities. Similarly, undergraduate students demonstrated relatively stable satisfaction levels from 2022 to 2024, with mean scores of 4.16, 4.04, and 4.00 respectively. In 2025, the mean score increased significantly to 4.57, reflecting a very high level of satisfaction with the library’s services and overall user experience. In summary, overall user satisfaction with the library remained consistently positive between 2022 and 2025, despite slight declines observed from 2022 to 2024. The substantial improvements recorded in 2025 suggest that the library successfully enhanced its services, facilities, and user support, contributing to stronger positive perceptions and higher satisfaction levels among both postgraduate and undergraduate students. 4.18 4.164.06 4.044.06 4.00 5.00 4.57 Postgraduate students Undergraduate students A MEANS SCORE FOR OVERALL SATISFACTION LEVEL 2022-2025 2022 2023 2024 2025
20 Figure 13: Overall Score means for five categories Figure 13 presents the overall mean scores for the five categories of library services from 2022 to 2025. Overall, the findings indicate consistently high levels of user satisfaction across all categories throughout the four-year period, with substantial improvements recorded in 2025. For Information Resources, the mean score declined from 4.14 in 2022 to 3.99 in both 2023 and 2024, before increasing significantly to 4.56 in 2025. This improvement suggests stronger user satisfaction with the accessibility, relevance, and adequacy of the library’s printed and online resources. Satisfaction with Library Services remained relatively stable, recording 4.19 in 2022, 4.10 in 2023, and 4.11 in 2024, before rising considerably to 4.57 in 2025. Similarly, Facilities and Equipment showed slight fluctuations from 4.09 in 2022 to 4.12 in 2023 and 4.07 in 2024, followed by a notable increase to 4.57 in 2025, indicating improved perceptions toward the library’s physical facilities and infrastructure. Among all five categories, Library Staff consistently recorded the highest satisfaction levels. Although the mean score decreased slightly from 4.32 in 2022 to 4.21 in 2024, it increased substantially to 4.58 in 2025, reflecting excellent user satisfaction with staff professionalism, friendliness, responsiveness, and helpfulness. Communication and Promotion also demonstrated a positive upward trend, with the mean score decreasing slightly from 4.19 in 2022 to 4.12 in 2024, before improving significantly to 4.57 in 2025. This suggests that users positively perceived the library’s communication strategies, promotional activities, and engagement efforts during that year. In summary, user satisfaction across all five categories remained consistently positive from 2022 to 2025, despite minor fluctuations between 2022 and 2024. The substantial improvements recorded in 2025 demonstrate the effectiveness of the library’s enhancement initiatives in strengthening service quality, facilities, staff performance, communication strategies, and information resource provision. Overall, the findings indicate that the library successfully improved users’ experiences and satisfaction levels across all major service areas. 4.14 4.19 4.09 4.32 4.19 3.99 4.10 4.12 4.29 4.15 3.99 4.11 4.07 4.21 4.12 4.56 4.57 4.57 4.58 4.57 I N F O R M A T I O N R E S O U R C E S L I B R A R Y S E R V I C E F A C I L I T I E S & E Q U I P M E N T L I B R A R Y S T A F F C O M M U N I C A T I O N & P R O M O T I O N O V E R A L L S C O R E M E A N S F O R F IV E C A T E G O R IE S 2 0 2 2 - 2 0 2 5 2022 2023 2024 2025
21 Frequency and Purposes of Library Visits The survey also examined the frequency and purposes of respondents’ visits to the library. The purpose is to gain insights into how often clients utilise library services and the factors that motivate their visits. Furthermore, identifying the purposes and frequency of the visits offers deeper insights into the diverse needs and interests of library users. These purposes include conducting research, borrowing materials, attending events or programs, accessing resources, seeking assistance from staff, or using the library as a quiet space for study or leisure. The detailed findings are presented in the following section. Figure 14: Frequency of Library Visit Figure 14 presents the frequency of library visits among postgraduate and undergraduate students in 2025. Overall, undergraduate students recorded the highest level of library usage, particularly for weekly visits, indicating strong engagement with library services and facilities. Among undergraduate students, the majority visited the library weekly, with 133 respondents recorded in this category. This was followed by monthly visits (64 respondents), daily visits (49 respondents), and once per semester visits (46 respondents). However, 19 undergraduate students reported that they never visited the library. These findings suggest that most undergraduate students actively utilise the library to support their academic and learning activities. In contrast, postgraduate students demonstrated lower but still consistent levels of library usage. Only one postgraduate student reported visiting the library monthly, while two respondents indicated visiting once per semester. No postgraduate students reported daily, weekly, or never visiting the library. The low frequency of visits among postgraduate students may suggest a greater reliance on online resources and digital library services for research and academic purposes. Overall, the findings indicate that undergraduate students were the primary users of the library in 2025, with weekly visits being the most common frequency of usage. The results also highlight differing patterns of library engagement between undergraduate and postgraduate students, reflecting variations in academic needs and resource usage preferences. 0 0 1 2 0 49 133 64 46 19 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 Daily Weekly Monthly Once per semester Never FREQUENCY OF LIBRARY VISIT Postgraduate students Undergraduate students
22 Purposes of a library visit In this survey, respondents were asked about the purpose of their visit to the library. There are six purposes provided in this survey, and respondents may select more than one answer. Figure 15: Purposes of Library Visit Figure 15 presents the purposes of library visits among postgraduate and undergraduate students in 2025. Overall, the findings indicate that academic-related activities were the primary reasons students visited the library, particularly for assignments, research, and the use of library facilities. Among undergraduate students, the highest number of respondents visited the library for assignments and research purposes, with 208 respondents recorded in this category. This was followed closely by the use of library facilities (194 respondents) and borrowing or returning books (147 respondents). In addition, 75 undergraduate students visited the library for socialising purposes, while 43 attended events or programmes, and 38 visited for classes. These findings suggest that undergraduate students actively utilise the library as a learning space and academic support centre. Postgraduate students recorded comparatively lower frequencies across all purposes of library visits. Three postgraduate students visited the library for assignments or research and for using library facilities, while one respondent visited for borrowing or returning books and socialising. No postgraduate students reported visiting the library for classes or events and programmes. The lower frequency of visits among postgraduate students may indicate a stronger dependence on online resources and digital services for their academic and research activities. In summary, the findings demonstrate that academic-related purposes, particularly assignments, research, and the use of library facilities, remained the main reasons for library visits in 2025. Undergraduate students were the most active library users, while postgraduate students showed comparatively lower physical usage of the library facilities. 3 1 0 0 1 3 208 147 38 43 75 194 0 50 100 150 200 250 Assignment / Research Borrow / Returning books Classes Events / Programmes Socializing Using Library Facilites PURPOSE OF LIBRARY VISIT Postgraduate students Undergraduate students
23 Figure 16: Overall Purposes of Library Visit Figure 16 presents the overall purposes of library visits among users in 2025. The findings indicate that academic-related activities remained the primary reasons for visiting the library, particularly for assignments and research purposes, which recorded the highest number of visits at 211. This was followed closely by the use of library facilities, with 197 recorded visits, highlighting the importance of the library as a conducive space for study and learning activities. Borrowing and returning books represented the third highest purpose of library visits, with 148 visits recorded. Meanwhile, 76 respondents visited the library for socialising purposes, suggesting that the library also functions as a collaborative and interactive environment for students. In addition, 43 visits were related to events and programmes, while attending classes recorded the lowest number of visits at 38. Overall, the findings demonstrate that the library continues to serve primarily as an academic support centre, particularly for assignments, research, and the use of facilities. Although social interaction and participation in events also contributed to library usage, these purposes were less prominent compared to academic-related activities. The results highlight the continued importance of maintaining supportive learning spaces, accessible resources, and functional facilities to meet users’ academic needs. IMPROVEMENT The final open-ended question let respondents share suggestions for improvement. Their responses were reviewed and analysed to find common ideas and issues. As a result, five main themes were identified, matching the survey’s key categories. Table 6: Open-ended answers for Improvement from respondents THEMES IMPROVEMENT INFORMATION RESOURCES 2 LIBRARY SERVICES 7 FACILITIES & EQUIPMENT 4 211 148 38 43 76 197 0 50 100 150 200 250 Assignment / Research Borrow / Returning books Classes Events / Programmes Socializing Using Library Facilites OVERALL PURPOSE OF LIBRARY VISIT
24 LIBRARY STAFF 3 COMMUNICATION & PROMOTION 2 TOTAL 18 Table 8 presents the thematic analysis of the open-ended responses from the survey, where respondents shared their suggestions and feedback regarding library services and facilities. A total of 18 comments were categorised into five main service areas. Under the Information Resources category, respondents requested more relevant reading materials and references, particularly for KSTCL students studying Bahasa Melayu and Arabic language materials. These responses indicate the importance of continuously enhancing the library collection to support students’ academic and language learning needs. For Library Services, several comments focused on improving access and operational convenience. Respondents highlighted issues related to matric card access and scanning problems, while others suggested extending the library operating hours until weekends and evenings. Feedback regarding the library environment was also noted, particularly concerning air- conditioning temperature and food accessibility within the library area. Facilities & Equipment received generally positive feedback, with respondents expressing satisfaction toward the convenience and quality of the library facilities. However, one respondent suggested the addition of a prayer room within the library to further enhance users’ comfort and convenience. Meanwhile, Library Staff received entirely positive comments. Respondents described the staff as helpful, friendly, and supportive, with specific appreciation expressed toward individual staff members. This reflects strong positive perceptions regarding staff professionalism and quality of service provided by the library staff. Similarly, comments under Communication & Promotion also reflected positive perceptions, particularly regarding staff helpfulness and communication with users. Overall, the open-ended responses indicate that users were generally satisfied with the library’s services and environment, while also providing several constructive suggestions for service enhancement and facility improvement. FINDING The findings of the 2025 Customer Satisfaction Survey indicate a very high level of user satisfaction toward the services and facilities provided by the Shared Facilities Library, IIUM Pagoh Campus. All five categories recorded mean scores well above the benchmark score of 4.00, demonstrating the library’s success in meeting users’ expectations. Among the categories assessed, Library Staff achieved the highest mean score (4.58), reflecting strong appreciation for staff professionalism, friendliness, and responsiveness. This was followed closely by Library Services, Facilities & Equipment, and Communication & Promotion, each recording a mean score of 4.57, indicating excellent satisfaction with the quality of services,
25 facilities, and communication efforts provided by the library. Although Information Resources recorded the lowest mean score (4.56), the result still reflects a very high level of satisfaction with the adequacy, accessibility, and relevance of the library’s collections and online resources. Overall, the findings demonstrate significant improvements in user satisfaction in 2025 compared to previous years, reflecting the effectiveness of the library’s continuous enhancement initiatives. The results confirm that the library continues to provide a supportive, user-centred, and high-quality learning environment for its users. Means Score 2022-2025 Initially, the target mean score for the Library Customer Satisfaction Survey was set at 3.00 on a 4-point Likert scale. In 2018, the Library Management revised the target and adopted a 5-point Likert scale, with the target mean score increased to 3.50. Effective from 2025, the target mean score was further raised to 4.00 and will remain in effect until otherwise directed by the Library Management. Figure 17: Overall Means 2022-2025 Figure 17 presents the overall mean scores for the Library Customer Satisfaction Survey from 2022 to 2025. Overall, the findings indicate consistently high levels of user satisfaction throughout the four-year period, with all scores remaining above the benchmark mean score of 4.00. The overall mean score recorded 4.19 in 2022 before slightly declining to 4.13 in 2023 and 4.02 in 2024. Despite these minor fluctuations, user satisfaction remained at a positive level. A significant improvement was observed in 2025, where the overall mean score increased substantially to 4.57, representing the highest score within the observed period. Overall, the findings demonstrate that the library successfully maintained positive user satisfaction from 2022 to 2025, with notable improvement in 2025 reflecting the effectiveness of continuous service enhancement initiatives and user-centred improvements implemented by the library. 4.19 4.13 4.02 4.57 3.70 3.80 3.90 4.00 4.10 4.20 4.30 4.40 4.50 4.60 4.70 2022 2023 2024 2025 OVERALL MEANS SCORE 2012-2025
26 Means Score for five categories 2022-2025 Table 9 presents the mean scores for the five satisfaction categories from 2022 to 2025, providing an overview of users’ perceptions toward the library’s services and facilities. Overall, the findings indicate consistently high levels of satisfaction across all categories, with all mean scores remaining above the benchmark score of 4.00 throughout the four-year period. Table 7: Means Score for five categories 2022-2025 In 2022, Library Staff recorded the highest mean score (4.43), followed by Communication & Promotion (4.37) and Information Resources (4.33). However, slight declines were observed across most categories in 2023 and 2024. Information Resources recorded the lowest mean score in 2024 (3.99), indicating comparatively lower satisfaction with the adequacy, accessibility, and relevance of library resources during that period. Similarly, Library Services and Communication & Promotion showed minor decreases between 2022 and 2024, although the scores remained within a satisfactory range. Despite these fluctuations, all categories demonstrated substantial improvement in 2025. Library Staff achieved the highest mean score (4.58), reflecting strong satisfaction with staff professionalism, friendliness, and responsiveness. Meanwhile, Library Services, Facilities & Equipment, and Communication & Promotion each recorded mean scores of 4.57, while Information Resources improved significantly to 4.56. These findings suggest that users were highly satisfied with the overall quality of library services, facilities, communication strategies, and information resources in 2025. Overall, the findings demonstrate a positive trend in customer satisfaction from 2022 to 2025, with 2025 representing the strongest performance across all five categories. The substantial improvements recorded in 2025 indicate that the library’s continuous enhancement initiatives and user-centred strategies have been effective in strengthening service quality and overall user satisfaction. CONCLUSION The 2025 Customer Satisfaction Survey findings demonstrate that the Shared Facilities Library, IIUM Pagoh Campus, successfully maintained a very high level of user satisfaction across all five service categories. All categories recorded mean scores well above the benchmark score of 4.00, reflecting the library’s continuous commitment to delivering quality services, effective communication, supportive facilities, and relevant information resources. Among the five categories, Library Staff achieved the highest mean score (4.58), indicating strong Categories 2022 2023 2024 2025 Information Resources 4.33 4.12 3.99 4.56 Library Services 4.21 4.12 4.11 4.57 Facilities & Equipment 3.92 3.96 4.07 4.57 Library Staff 4.43 4.17 4.21 4.58 Communication & Promotion 4.37 4.09 4.12 4.57
27 user appreciation toward staff professionalism, friendliness, responsiveness, and helpfulness. Library Services, Facilities & Equipment, and Communication & Promotion also recorded excellent mean scores (4.57 respectively), while Information Resources achieved a high satisfaction score of 4.56. These findings indicate that users were highly satisfied with the overall quality of services and support provided by the library. The survey also revealed that undergraduate students were the primary users of the library, with assignments, research, and the use of library facilities identified as the main purposes of visits. Weekly visits were recorded as the most common pattern of library usage, highlighting the library’s important role in supporting students’ academic and learning activities. Despite the positive findings, several areas for improvement were identified through the open- ended responses, particularly regarding facilities, internet connectivity, library website performance, study spaces, and enhancement of online resources. These suggestions provide valuable insights for future planning and continuous service enhancement initiatives. Overall, the findings demonstrate that the library has successfully strengthened user satisfaction and service quality in 2025 compared to previous years. The significant improvement across all categories reflects the effectiveness of the library’s continuous enhancement initiatives and user- centred strategies. Moving forward, the library should continue maintaining high service standards, improving facilities and information resources, and strengthening user engagement to ensure a dynamic, accessible, and supportive learning environment for all users.
28 APPENDIX A SAMPLE SIZE CALCULATOR BY RAOSOFT, INC.
29 APPENDIX B CUSTOMER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2025 Congratulations on being the respondent to the survey. The Dar al-Hikmah Library, IIUM conducts this survey annually to assess the library customers’ level of satisfaction with the library services, resources, and facilities at the campus libraries. Please take a moment to complete this questionnaire. We will make sure that your participation is anonymous. Collected data will only be accessible to the library researchers conducting the survey. We appreciate your cooperation. Thank you. 1. Status: Ο Full time Ο Part-time Ο Contract basis 2. Category: Ο Academic Staff Ο Administrative Staff Ο Postgraduate Student Ο Undergraduate Student Ο Foundation Student 3. Kulliyyah/Centre/ Institute/Office: Ο AIKOL Ο KAED Ο KAHS Ο KON Ο INHART Ο AHAS KIRKHS Ο KOED Ο KICT Ο KOM Ο KOD Ο CELPAD Ο PLANETIIUM Ο KENMS Ο KOE Ο IIiBF Ο ISTAC Ο KOP Ο KOS Ο KSTCL Ο CFS Ο SASMEC Ο Others: Ο IIUM ACADEMY 4. 5. 6. Campus: Gender: Nationality: Ο Gombak Ο Male Ο Malaysian Ο Kuantan Ο Female Ο International Ο Gambang Ο Pagoh Ο Kuala Lumpur PART 2 – Please indicate how satisfied you are with the library A. INFORMATION RESOURCES To what extent are you satisfied with the following information resources: Very Dissatisfied Dissatisfied Somewhat Satisfied Satisfied Very Satisfied 1. Required and recommended references as listed in the Course Outlines meet my learning and research needs Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο 2. Printed resources (e.g. books, journals, etc.) meet my learning and research needs Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο 3. Online resources (e.g. online databases, e-books, e-thesis, e- journals etc.) meet my learning and research needs Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο 4. The information resources are current and relevant Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο B. SERVICES To what extent are you satisfied with the following services: Very Dissatisfied Dissatisfied Somewhat Satisfied Satisfied Very Satisfied 1. Library Online Catalog Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο 2. Library Skills Classes Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο 3. Library counters services Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο 4. Reference or research enquiries Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο PART 1 – Please choose your background information
30 C. FACILITIES & EQUIPMENT To what extent are you satisfied with the following facilities & equipment: Very Dissatisfied Dissatisfied Somewhat Satisfied Satisfied Very Satisfied 1. Reading area Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο 2. Study rooms (Discussion/Carrel/Research rooms, etc.) Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο 3. Computer Lab Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο 4. WIFI access Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο D. LIBRARY STAFF Satisfaction with the helpfulness/timely/friendliness/convenience of the staff in dealing with library clients. Very Dissatisfied Dissatisfied Somewhat Satisfied Satisfied Very Satisfied 1. Library staff are professional, approachable and friendly Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο 2. Library staff provide accurate answers to my enquiries Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο 3. Library staff are willing to assist and provide helpful information Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο E. COMMUNICATION AND PROMOTION Satisfaction with how information is communicated (medium/speed/language used, etc.) Very Dissatisfied Dissatisfied Somewhat Satisfied Satisfied Very Satisfied 1. Signage is clear and appropriate Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο 2. Library website and social media are informative and interactive Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο 3. Updates on Library services, facilities and activities are prompt Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο 4. Library exhibitions are enlightening and interesting Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο F. How frequently do you visit the library? Ο Daily Ο Weekly Ο Monthly Ο Once per semester Ο Never G. What are your purposes for coming to the library? (You may select more than one answer) Ο Classes Ο Socializing Ο Borrowing/returning books Ο Events/Programmes Ο Assignment/Research Ο Using library facilities (e.g. Labs, internet, rooms, etc.) H. Overall, are you satisfied with the Library? Ο Very Dissatisfied Ο Dissatisfied Ο Somewhat Satisfied Ο Satisfied Ο Very Satisfied I. Any suggestion(s) to improve the library services? ___________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________ Thank you for taking the time to complete this questionnaire. If you have any inquiries, please contact the following: Dar al-Hikmah Library Gombak: 03-64214815 Syed Muhammad Naquib al-Attas Library: 03-64211260 Dar al-Hikmah Library Kuantan: 09-5704180 Dar al-Hikmah Library Centre for Foundation Studies: 09-5183480 Pagoh Campus Library: 06-9742425
31 APPENDIX C List of open-ended answers for Improvement according to five categories. 1. Information Resources No. Comments 1. I hope there is more reading material and sources for us as a KSTCL students that learn Bahasa Malay 2. Banyakkan Kitab Arab 2. Services No Comments 1. I can’t scan my card. I hope my card's issues can be solved 2. UIA matric card takleh access 3. Maybe library can be operating on weekends 4. Kurangkan sejukkk aircond 5. Put food 6. Library is very cold, enjoyable to study 7. Opening hours till 10pm, weekends also open 3. Facilities and Equipment No Comments 1. Nice facilities 2. Best facilities 3. All facilities are very convenient 4. It's better if there's a prayer room in the library 4. Library Staff No Comments 1. The staff are nice. 2. Staff are very helping 3. Kudos to Br. Hazwan! 5. Communication No Comments 1. Overall good 2. Everything is acceptable