IS428 AY2019-20T2 Assign NEO TEE YONG

SMU Library Survey

Background

Every two years, SMU Libraries conduct a comprehensive survey in which faculty, students and staff have the opportunity to rate various aspects of SMU library's services. The survey provides SMU libraries with input to help enhance existing services and to anticipate emerging needs of SMU faculty, students and staff.

Objectives

With the feedback obtain from the survey, I am tasked to utilize visual analytics approach to reveal the level of services provided by SMU libraries as perceived by:

• the undergraduate students,
• the postgraduate students,
• the faculty,
• the staff.

Summarising Data Set & Planning for Visualisation

The Dataset being used in this visualisation is from SMU Library: 2018 Survey Results. Can be found here

Dashboard	Purpose	Variable Require	Measurement
Overview	This will be the home dashboard of the visualisation which summarise the entire processed data. It is interactive as viewer able to toggle filtering simply by selecting the field. This include: Total number of respondents and the background of the respondents Total respondents reponding to Li Ka Shing and Kwa Geok Choo Law Libraries respectively Total respondents from different position such as Undergraduate/ Graduate / Staff/ Faculty Total respondents from different study area such as Accountancy/ Business/ Economics	StudyArea, ResponseID, Position	Number of respondents
Importance VS Performance	This dashboard will provide an overview of respondents' response to libraries service. Rating their importancy and performance for different aspect. Presenting 1 being the lowest to 7 the highest. This will be a interactive interface where viewer able to toggle filtering to narrow down the details such as filtering through which library, which study area and their group position	Assessment Item, Score, HowOftenL, HowOftenW	Distribution of score rating 1 - 7, Number of respondents
Summary	This dashboard will provide an summary of the analysed data where viewer able to compare satisfactory between study area to on the general scale. This could acts as a medium for library to target specific study area to cater to their needs. It also allow viewer to see respondents relationship towards recommending to others based on their overall satisfactory	StudyArea, Number of Records, likelihood of recommend the library service to others	Satisfactory difference between study area Correlation between people who are satisfied and people who likely to recommend to others

Hand-drawn visualisation

                                                                              Overview

Chart1:

Chart2:

                                                                       Importance vs Performance

For performance and important (chart 3&4):

                                                                             Summary

Chart 5:

Chart 6:

Data preparation

Screenshot	Steps Taken
	Data Preparation: Hiding Hide column NA1-NA26 and comment by right clicking and select hide
	Data Preparation: Pivot Select column from I01-P27 Right click and select pivot
	Data Preparation: Renaming Rename the column heading: 'Pivot Field Names' to 'Assessment Item' 'Pivot Field Values' to 'Score' 'How Often L' to 'Visit Library Frequency' 'How Often C' to 'Visit Campus Frequency' 'How Often W' to 'Resources Used Frequency' 'Nps1' to 'likelihood of recommend the library service'
	Edit Alias for fields Right click the attribute Select Aliases Change the value(Alias) Change for Position, Study Area,Campus, Frequency
	New calculated field and set Gannt percent, Gannt start, count negative, total count negative, percentage, total count for creating divergent chart in Important Vs Performance Dashboard. Kwa Geok Choo Law Library & Li Ka Shing Library for creating pyramid chart in Overview Dashboard. Performance Score and Important Score were use for Important Vs Performance Dashboard to show the meaning of the legend PositionGroup were use to group position together for filtering and for Overview Dashboard.

Interactive Visualization

The interactive visualization can be accessed here:https://public.tableau.com/profile/neo.tee.yong#!/vizhome/assignment3_15842852167560/LibrarySurvery2018

Overview Dashboard

Overview dashboard.This dashboard depicts a pyramid chart with Kwa Geok Choo Law and Li Ka Shing Libraries with the number of respondents in each study area. It also shows the demographic of the respondents. The interactivity allows user to examine the no. of respondents from KGC Law and LKS libraries in each study area and also in demographic of people in each study area

Library Importance vs Performance

Library Importance vs Performance dashboard. This dashboard shows a divergent chart (Library Performance) as the main visualisation of both important and performance of each different aspect. The interactive of the filter button allows users to narrow the search to get the information easily.

Summary

Summary dashboard. This dashboard shows a stacked bar graph of each study area rating the performance of the libraries. It also have a Correlation matrix table that allows users to see the degree of correlation between the rating given to the performance against the likelihood of them recommending to others. The interactive of the filter button allows users to narrow the search to get the information easily.

Findings

Insights

S/N	screen shot	Insight and Significance
1		Library Performance vs Importance 2,027 respondents from the undergraduate.In general, more than 75% of the undergraduate are satisfied and more than satisfied in library performance of the 4 segments – communication, facilities & equipment, information resources and service delivery. Out of the 3 satisfied ratings, very satisfied have the most respondents except for facilities & equipment. Comparing with importance: 1.Communication and service delivery are the more consistent segments between their performance and importance. For example, communication performance satisfied metrics were 29%, 30%, 20% while the importance were 25%, 29%, 25%. Whereas, service delivery segment is moderate. 2.However, facilities & equipment segment contribute to bigger gap such as more than 25% difference between their performance and importance in their highly satisfied ratings. Moreover, this segment shows more respondents that are dissatisfied in overall.
2		328 undergraduates from accountancy show a 2% higher highly satisfied as compare to highly important in service delivery segment, differentiating this category of undergraduate from the rest.
3		22 law undergraduate that visit library and uses the resources daily has 7% highly satisfied performance than highly importance in the communication segment. Communication segment had performed fairly well in this set of filter.
4		229 Undergraduate that visit the library monthly has 3% highly satisfied performance than highly importance in the service delivery segment. Therefore, from previous insight, SMU Library could conduct a more detail interview with undergraduate from accountancy that visit the library monthly about the strength of delivery service quality and make improvement.

Reference

<ref>https://www.datarevelations.com/resources/visualizing-net-promoter-score-data/<ref>
<ref>https://www.datarevelations.com/resources/rethinkingdivergent/<ref>
<ref>https://www.datarevelations.com/resources/got-likert-data-neutrals/<ref>
<ref>https://blog.hubspot.com/service/how-to-calculate-nps<ref>
<ref>https://www.udemy.com/course/tableau10-advanced/<ref>
Prof week 6 class exercise on divergent chart