农业图书馆竞争力的比较研究
|
摘要
在信息技术不断发展以及知识经济的背景下，农业图书馆的研究领域得到了逐步扩充和不断深化，其科研影响力和社会服务水平得到了大幅度的增长并取得了举世瞩目的变化和丰硕的研究成果。面对新的信息环境，农业图书馆面临着新的机遇与挑战。农业图书馆如何保持、培育和提高竞争能力，寻求更大的发展空间，是学术界必须思考和回答的一个问题。研究农业图书馆竞争力问题已经成为农业图书馆不断进步过程中需要给予关注的一个重要课题。
运用文献计量学、竞争情报学、信息管理学等学科的理论与方法，利用Web of Science、中国知网(CNKI)数据库对国内外图书馆竞争力相关文献进行统计分析。采用文本挖掘技术，以近10年来发表的图书馆竞争力论文及其引文作为科学指标，利用以定量分析为主的科学知识图谱可视化分析方法，从文献计量学的视角揭示图书馆竞争力的发展现状，分析图书馆竞争力的代表人物及代表作品、权威期刊、涉及学科以及图书馆竞争力的研究热点及研究前沿。分析检索出的相关文献的基本结构体系，从时空分布、研究机构、高产作者以及主题词词频等方面进行分析。
分别利用层次分析法和DEA数据包络分析的方法对农业图书馆竞争力进行评价分析。在利用层次分析法对农业图书馆进行竞争力评价的过程中，构建农业图书馆竞争力评价模型，在准则层设置信息资源竞争力、人力资源竞争力、社会服务竞争力、信息化建设竞争力、科研产出竞争力和社会影响力6项指标，在指标层共设立了文献信息资源总量等共17项指标分别对国内外农业图书馆竞争力进行比较分析。使用DEA数据包络分析法对国内外农业图书馆竞争力效率进行评价分析。使用CCR模型以及BBC模型对农业图书馆竞争力效率值进行计算分析和比较，对各所农业图书馆的投入冗余和产出不足情况进行比较和分析。采用超效率方法对农业图书馆竞争力进行综合排序。此外根据分析结果，提出投入与产出的优化改进方法。
使用定标比超方法对中国国家农业图书馆、美国国家农业图书馆、匈牙利国家农业文献与情报中心和波兰中央农业图书馆4所国家级农业专业图书馆竞争力进行比较。分别就农业专业图书馆在机构结构、信息资源建设成效、信息服务能力以及服务政策等方面的差异进行比较分析。
使用SWOT分析方法对农业专业图书馆的优劣势进行分析。分别就农业专业图书馆在优势、劣势、机会和威胁4个方面进行了具体的阐述。最后根据SWOT分析内容得出解决优势、劣势、机会、威胁组合的SO组合策略、WO组合策略、ST组合策略和WT组合策略。
使用关键成功因素方法对农业图书馆竞争力优势者自身发展特色及优势进行深入剖析。通过对美国国家农业图书馆关键成功因素分析，就该馆在优化资源结构、重视对信息资源的开发与利用、提供特色信息服务、充分利用信息技术、积极与外界合作与交流与强化物理基础设施以及灾难恢复能力建设等方面进行深入挖掘，以期为其他农业图书馆在激烈的竞争中获得优势得到借鉴。通过应用波特五力模型的方法就农业图书馆发展制约因素进行分析。对农业图书馆在潜在进入者、替代者、用户、供应商以及已经存在的竞争者5种不同力量冲击下的发展制约因素。
最后对全文内容进行归纳和总结并提出充分利用信息技术、提高信息服务能力及科研支持力度、加强经费使用效率以及培养优秀农业图书馆人才的研究建议。
Agricultural library is a center for agricultural information and knowledge and is the product ofsocial and historical development. After years of development, agricultural library has made remarkablechanges and also achieved fruitful research results. Under the background of information technologyand knowledge-based economy, agricultural library's research areas have been gradually expanding anddeepening, its research influences and the level of providing social services has also been substantialincreased. In the context of the information environment, agricultural library is facing new opportunitiesand challenges. How to maintain, cultivate and improve competitiveness of agricultural library, and toseek more room for development is a question which must be considered and answered. The study ofagricultural libraries competitiveness has become an important issue accompanying process ofcontinuous improvement in agricultural library.
Using the theories and methods of bibliometrics, competitive intelligence and informationmanagement, this paper conduct a statistical analysis on library competences with the scope in Web ofScience and CNKI databases both in China and abroad. Using the lately published10years articles onlibrary competence and its citations as scientific indicators to evaluate the quality of papers. Use themethods based on the Using quantitative analysis method and information visualization technology toreveals the status-quo and development trends of library competence from a bibliometrics perspective.Analysis library competence influential papers, academic leaders, authoritative journals, the subjectsinvolved, research focus and research frontier in the field. Using text-mining technology to analyz thebasic structure of the literature distribution from time and space, research institutions, highly yield termsfrequency, research hotspots.
Use Analytic Hierarchy Process method(AHP) and Data Envelopment Analysis method(DEA) to evaluate agricultural library competences respectively. Building agricultural library competenceevaluation model using AHP method. In the target layer, set information resource, human resources,social service capability, information construction, sscientific research output and social influence ascompetence indicators and17criteria layer indicators to evaluate the competences of11agriculturallibraries. Using Data Envelopment Analysis method to12domestic and foreign agricultural libraries toevaluate their competences. Use the CCR models as well as the BBC model for computational analysis,compare the efficiency of the competence indicators of each agricultural libraryies. Compare andanalyze the input redundancy and output deficiency in the12agricultural library. Use thesuper-efficiency method for the futher sorting of the agricultural library competences and provides theimproved method for the optimization of input and output indicators.
Using the benchmarking method to evaluate the competitiveness of professional agriculturallibraris. The paper take four national professional Agricultural Library, namely China NationalAgricultural Library, U.S. National Agricultural Library, Agricultural Documentation and InformationCenter of the Hungarian and Poland Central Agricultural Library to evaluate their competence.Benchmarking areas are mainly set on the affiliations of the four agricultural professional libraries, theconstruction of paper information resources as well as electronic information resources, their types ofbasic services, network information services, value-added services as well as the subject theme-basedservices and finally the professional information systems were compared. It also analyze the differencesof policies of the four professional agricultual libraries.
Use the SWOT analysis method to analyze the advantages and disadvantages of professionalagricultural library. According to the SWOT analysis of advantages, disadvantages, opportunities andthreats combination, it provides SO strategy, WO strategy, ST strategy and WT strategy.
Use Key Success Factors Method to do an in-depth analysis of agricultural library’s competitive advantages. Take the U.S. National Agricultural Library as an example to study its competitiveadvantages including their optimizing structure of resources, unique services, use of informationtechnology, cooperation, physical infrastructure and disaster recovery in order for other agriculturallibraries to learn from it in the fierce competition. Through using Porter's five forces model, the paperdo a specific analysis on agricultural library development constraints. Through the analysis of the threatof potential entrants, the threat of replacement, the threat from the user, the bargaining power ofsuppliers, as well as existing competitors, the paper make a wholesomely analyzes to the developingconstraints of agricultural library.
Finally, summarize the full text context and present research proposals including using informationtechnology to strengthen agricultural library service capabilities, strengthen the studying of agriculturallibrary users’ information needs, strengthen the capabilities in providing information services,strengthen the support in doing research, impose the using of agricultural library funds efficiently,training outstanding agricultural librarians and improve building the core value as the developmentstrategies.
运用文献计量学、竞争情报学、信息管理学等学科的理论与方法，利用Web of Science、中国知网(CNKI)数据库对国内外图书馆竞争力相关文献进行统计分析。采用文本挖掘技术，以近10年来发表的图书馆竞争力论文及其引文作为科学指标，利用以定量分析为主的科学知识图谱可视化分析方法，从文献计量学的视角揭示图书馆竞争力的发展现状，分析图书馆竞争力的代表人物及代表作品、权威期刊、涉及学科以及图书馆竞争力的研究热点及研究前沿。分析检索出的相关文献的基本结构体系，从时空分布、研究机构、高产作者以及主题词词频等方面进行分析。
分别利用层次分析法和DEA数据包络分析的方法对农业图书馆竞争力进行评价分析。在利用层次分析法对农业图书馆进行竞争力评价的过程中，构建农业图书馆竞争力评价模型，在准则层设置信息资源竞争力、人力资源竞争力、社会服务竞争力、信息化建设竞争力、科研产出竞争力和社会影响力6项指标，在指标层共设立了文献信息资源总量等共17项指标分别对国内外农业图书馆竞争力进行比较分析。使用DEA数据包络分析法对国内外农业图书馆竞争力效率进行评价分析。使用CCR模型以及BBC模型对农业图书馆竞争力效率值进行计算分析和比较，对各所农业图书馆的投入冗余和产出不足情况进行比较和分析。采用超效率方法对农业图书馆竞争力进行综合排序。此外根据分析结果，提出投入与产出的优化改进方法。
使用定标比超方法对中国国家农业图书馆、美国国家农业图书馆、匈牙利国家农业文献与情报中心和波兰中央农业图书馆4所国家级农业专业图书馆竞争力进行比较。分别就农业专业图书馆在机构结构、信息资源建设成效、信息服务能力以及服务政策等方面的差异进行比较分析。
使用SWOT分析方法对农业专业图书馆的优劣势进行分析。分别就农业专业图书馆在优势、劣势、机会和威胁4个方面进行了具体的阐述。最后根据SWOT分析内容得出解决优势、劣势、机会、威胁组合的SO组合策略、WO组合策略、ST组合策略和WT组合策略。
使用关键成功因素方法对农业图书馆竞争力优势者自身发展特色及优势进行深入剖析。通过对美国国家农业图书馆关键成功因素分析，就该馆在优化资源结构、重视对信息资源的开发与利用、提供特色信息服务、充分利用信息技术、积极与外界合作与交流与强化物理基础设施以及灾难恢复能力建设等方面进行深入挖掘，以期为其他农业图书馆在激烈的竞争中获得优势得到借鉴。通过应用波特五力模型的方法就农业图书馆发展制约因素进行分析。对农业图书馆在潜在进入者、替代者、用户、供应商以及已经存在的竞争者5种不同力量冲击下的发展制约因素。
最后对全文内容进行归纳和总结并提出充分利用信息技术、提高信息服务能力及科研支持力度、加强经费使用效率以及培养优秀农业图书馆人才的研究建议。
Agricultural library is a center for agricultural information and knowledge and is the product ofsocial and historical development. After years of development, agricultural library has made remarkablechanges and also achieved fruitful research results. Under the background of information technologyand knowledge-based economy, agricultural library's research areas have been gradually expanding anddeepening, its research influences and the level of providing social services has also been substantialincreased. In the context of the information environment, agricultural library is facing new opportunitiesand challenges. How to maintain, cultivate and improve competitiveness of agricultural library, and toseek more room for development is a question which must be considered and answered. The study ofagricultural libraries competitiveness has become an important issue accompanying process ofcontinuous improvement in agricultural library.
Using the theories and methods of bibliometrics, competitive intelligence and informationmanagement, this paper conduct a statistical analysis on library competences with the scope in Web ofScience and CNKI databases both in China and abroad. Using the lately published10years articles onlibrary competence and its citations as scientific indicators to evaluate the quality of papers. Use themethods based on the Using quantitative analysis method and information visualization technology toreveals the status-quo and development trends of library competence from a bibliometrics perspective.Analysis library competence influential papers, academic leaders, authoritative journals, the subjectsinvolved, research focus and research frontier in the field. Using text-mining technology to analyz thebasic structure of the literature distribution from time and space, research institutions, highly yield termsfrequency, research hotspots.
Use Analytic Hierarchy Process method(AHP) and Data Envelopment Analysis method(DEA) to evaluate agricultural library competences respectively. Building agricultural library competenceevaluation model using AHP method. In the target layer, set information resource, human resources,social service capability, information construction, sscientific research output and social influence ascompetence indicators and17criteria layer indicators to evaluate the competences of11agriculturallibraries. Using Data Envelopment Analysis method to12domestic and foreign agricultural libraries toevaluate their competences. Use the CCR models as well as the BBC model for computational analysis,compare the efficiency of the competence indicators of each agricultural libraryies. Compare andanalyze the input redundancy and output deficiency in the12agricultural library. Use thesuper-efficiency method for the futher sorting of the agricultural library competences and provides theimproved method for the optimization of input and output indicators.
Using the benchmarking method to evaluate the competitiveness of professional agriculturallibraris. The paper take four national professional Agricultural Library, namely China NationalAgricultural Library, U.S. National Agricultural Library, Agricultural Documentation and InformationCenter of the Hungarian and Poland Central Agricultural Library to evaluate their competence.Benchmarking areas are mainly set on the affiliations of the four agricultural professional libraries, theconstruction of paper information resources as well as electronic information resources, their types ofbasic services, network information services, value-added services as well as the subject theme-basedservices and finally the professional information systems were compared. It also analyze the differencesof policies of the four professional agricultual libraries.
Use the SWOT analysis method to analyze the advantages and disadvantages of professionalagricultural library. According to the SWOT analysis of advantages, disadvantages, opportunities andthreats combination, it provides SO strategy, WO strategy, ST strategy and WT strategy.
Use Key Success Factors Method to do an in-depth analysis of agricultural library’s competitive advantages. Take the U.S. National Agricultural Library as an example to study its competitiveadvantages including their optimizing structure of resources, unique services, use of informationtechnology, cooperation, physical infrastructure and disaster recovery in order for other agriculturallibraries to learn from it in the fierce competition. Through using Porter's five forces model, the paperdo a specific analysis on agricultural library development constraints. Through the analysis of the threatof potential entrants, the threat of replacement, the threat from the user, the bargaining power ofsuppliers, as well as existing competitors, the paper make a wholesomely analyzes to the developingconstraints of agricultural library.
Finally, summarize the full text context and present research proposals including using informationtechnology to strengthen agricultural library service capabilities, strengthen the studying of agriculturallibrary users’ information needs, strengthen the capabilities in providing information services,strengthen the support in doing research, impose the using of agricultural library funds efficiently,training outstanding agricultural librarians and improve building the core value as the developmentstrategies.
引文
1.白首晏.DEA方法在高校图书馆效率评价中的应用[J].情报杂志，2002(6):15-16.
2.陈耀胜，李惠珍．论高校图书馆核心竞争力[J]．新世纪图书馆，2006(2)：3-6
3.陈悦，刘则渊，陈劲．科学知识略谈的发展历程[J].科学学研究，2008（３）：449－458
4.邓麦村．中国科学院统计年鉴2010[M]．科学出版社，2011
5.冯文春.基于核心竞争力的高校图书馆评价指标体系研究[J].价值工程，2011（24）：282
6.范红霞，刘泽隆.高校图书馆资源使用效率测定的DEA模型分析[J].情报杂志，2008(4):157-158.
7.符绍宏．创新图书馆信息组织体系的战略思考[J]．图书馆杂志，2006(6)：8-12
8.戈德史密斯N，马凯A L．科学的科学——技术时代的社会[M]．赵红州，蒋国华译．北京：科学出版社，1985．231
9.顾颖.《中国图书馆分类法》第5版医学类表性能测评——兼与《杜威十进分类法》第22版医学类表的比较[J].图书馆理论与实践，2010（6）:52-55
10.郭雪梅.高校图书馆核心竞争力评价体系研究[D].天津大学，2010
11.黄长著.国外人文社会科学管理及政策的若干问题[J]，社会科学管理与评论，2004（4）：74-80
12.黄建年,侯汉清.马克思主义在图书分类法中的列类研究《:中国图书馆分类法》A大类的改造[J].图书情报工作，2010，54（19）：10-14
13.黄金霞，宋文，刘峥，景丽.学科领域本体建设的一个实证研究——兼论杜威分类法与中图分类法的再次比较[J].图书馆杂志.2010(7):21-25
14.蒋永福.图书馆与知识组织：从知识组织的角度理解图书馆学[J].中国图书馆学报，1999（5）
15. J.科尔，S.科尔．科学界的社会分层[M]．北京：华夏出版社，1989．17
16.杰西H谢拉；张丽沙译.图书馆学引论[M].兰州：兰州大学出版社，1986：65-66
17.金婷.基于DEA模型的图书馆效益评价研究[D].成都:成都理工大学，2009.
18.瞿振元，柯炳生.中国农业大学年鉴2009[M].北京:中国农业大学出版社,2010
19.李福华.高等学校资源利用效率研究[M].北京:北京师范大学出版社，2002:7-8.
20.李建霞.省域公共图书馆绩效的DEA测算与评价[J].图书馆论坛，2008，28(4):49-52.
21.李建霞.运用数据包络分析我国高校图书馆服务效率[J].广西示范大学学报，2008，44(5):121-126.
22.刘作义，陈晓田．科学研究评价的性质、作用、方法及程序．科研管理[J]，2002（2）：34
23.毛军.元数据、自由分类法(Folksonomy)和大众的因特网[J].现代图书情报技术.2006(2):1-9
24.孟凡红.中医药图书馆核心竞争力评价研究[D].中国中医科学院，2009
25.孟广均.国外图书馆与信息学教育：调研与思考.变革发展前瞻：第二届中美数字时代图书馆学情报学教育国际研讨会论文集[C].武汉：武汉大学出版社，2007：1-7
26.宁建新.我国企业核心竞争力的组合与构建[J].商业经济与管理，2001，（30）：33-38
27.宁梓煜.公共图书馆核心竞争力的提升研究[D].东北师范大学，2008
28.普通高等学校图书馆评估指标（征求意见稿）.[2011-12-10].http://162.105.140.111/tugongwei/info/detail.asp?lngID=52
29.邱均平，杨瑞仙，丁敬达.世界一流大学与科研机构学科竞争力评价研究报告[M].北京:科学出版社，2009
30.阮冈纳赞著；夏云，王先林等译．图书馆学五定律[M]．北京：书目文献出版社，1988：403
31.时希杰，吴育华，方志刚.高校图书馆核心竞争力评价研究[J].情报科学，2005(23)：1331-1335
32.宋剑祥，新世纪我国图书馆学研究面临的新课题[J]，高校信息工作，2000（3）：14-16
33.孙丽艳，陈浩义，马瑞川.图书馆核心竞争力及其评价指标[J].图书馆建设，2008（8）：31-34
34.滕清秀.运用DEA方法研究高校图书馆的作用研究[J].图书馆研究与工作，2009(3):28-31.
35.王磊.军医大学重点学科核心竞争力整合途径及其整合历程研究[D].第三军医大学硕士学位论文，2004
36.王胜利，白雪梅，何贤英.自由分类法与传统分类法的比较研究[J].情报杂志,2010(29):179-181
37.王毅,陈劲，许庆瑞．企业核心能力：理论溯源与逻辑结构剖析[J]．管理科学学报，2003(3)：24-32，43
38.魏新，张万奇.高等学校资源使用效率评估指标体系闭[J]．.教育与经济，l-5，(2).
39.吴利萍.高校图书馆投入产出相对有效性分析[J].内蒙古科技与经济，2008（4）：123-124.
40.夏忠华.信息工作与企业竞争力[M].北京:企业管理出版社，1997
41.肖珑，李浩凌，徐成. CALIS数字资源评估指标体系及其应用指南[J].大学图书馆学报，2008（3）：2-8.
42.徐革.我国大学图书馆电子资源绩效评价方法及其应用研究[D].西南交通大学，2006
43.杨斌.基于价值链的图书馆核心能力研究[D]，郑州大学，2007
44.杨光.美国图书馆事业发展回顾[J]，九江师专学报(哲学社会科学版)，2001（3）：50-54
45.杨沛霆.新世纪企业十大应变[J].中外管理，2001（增刊）：154-172
46.杨文祥，郑晓雯.图书馆学研究方法与方法论体系影响因素分析--关于21世纪图书馆学方法论体系及相关问题的若干思考之一[J].图书与情报，2007（2）：1-8
47.杨志敏．图书馆核心竞争力的思考[J]．图书馆理论与实践，2003(6)：9-11
48.叶继元.坚守与拓展——数字时代中美图书馆学情报学教育科学定位的战略思考.变革发展前瞻：第二届中美数字时代图书馆学情报学教育国际研讨会论文集[C].武汉：武汉大学出版社，2007：59-81
49.尤江东.图书馆核心价值的再认识——由当前图书馆面临的危机和挑战引出的思考[J]，中国西部科技，2008(10)：92-94
50.曾莉红.图书馆学核心竞争力初探[J].西南民族大学学报(人文社科版)，2007（7）：232-234
51.曾志平.湖南省高校重点学科核心竞争力研究[D].湖南师范大学.2007
52.翟虎渠．中国农业科学院年鉴2010[M]．中国农业科学技术出版社，2011
53.张聪，吕宁．试谈学术评价定量化[J]．江汉石油学院学报（社会科学版），2003（3）：88-89
54.张红霞.图书馆质量评估体系与国际标准[M].北京：国家图书馆出版社，2008.12
55.张俊玲．略论高校图书馆核心竞争力的提升[J]，高校图书馆工作，2007(2)：80-8l，92
56.张黎.高校图书馆效率评价研究[D]．重庆：西南大学，2007
57.张维迎.你的企业有“核心竞争力”吗？[J]招商周刊，2006（6）：68-69
58.张彦．论科学与技术在社会堂上的三个主要区别[J]．南京社会科学，1998（8）：29-34
59.张应祥.图书馆信息服务质量综合评价研究[D].西北工业大学,2006
60.赵燕芳，段宇锋.对数据包络分析方法应用于图书馆效率评价的思考[J].情报理论与实践，2010，33(6):98-102.
61.钟晓玫.图书馆评估论文简析[J].兰台世界，2008（12）：75-76
62. Aaron, Bruce C. Determining the Business Impact of Knowledge Management[J]. PerformanceImprovement,2009,48(4):35-45.
63. Abels, Eileen G., Paul B Kantor, and Tefko Saracevic. Studying the Cost and Value of Library andInformation Services: Applying Functional Cost美国国家农业图书馆ysis to the Library inTransition[J]. Journal of the American Society for Information Science,1996,47,(3):217-227.
64. Ackermann, Eric. Program Assessment in Academic Libraries[J]. Research&Practice inAssessment,2007,1,(2):1-9.
65. Ahtola, A. Anneli. How to Evaluate and Measure the Impact of the Library’s Collection on theLearning Outcome?[C].68th IFLA Council and General Conference.2002.
66. ALA. Core Values Statement.[EB/OL].. http://www.ala.org/ala/aboutala/offices/oif/statementspols/corevalues.cfmaccess[2011-3-02]
67. Andrea Saayman, Jaco Pienaar, Patrick de Pelsmacker, Wilma Viviers, Ludo Cuyvers, Marie-LuceMuller, Marc Jegers.Competitive intelligence: construct exploration, validation and equivalence[J],Aslib Proceedings,2008,60(4):383–411.
68. Ashton, A.. Syndicating Rich Bibliographic metadata using MODS and RSS [J]. Journal of WebLibrarianship,2008,2(1):41-59
69. Audunson, Ragnar. The Public Library as a Meeting-Place in a Multicultural and Digital Context[J].Journal of Documentation,2005,61,(3):429-441.
70. Ballard, Susan. What can Teacher-Librarians do to Promote Their Work and the School LibraryMedia Program? Be Visible, Assess, and Provide Evidence[J]. Teacher Librarian,2008,36,(2):22-23.
71. Berverlee A. French. User Needs and Library Services in Agricultural Sciences[J]. Library Trands.1990, Winter:415-426
72. Bennett, Scott. Libraries and Learning: A History of Paradigm Change[J]. Portal: Libraries and theAcademy,2009,9,(2):181-197.
73. Biggs, John. The Reflective Institution: Assuring and Enhancing the Quality of Teaching andLearning[J]. Higher Education,2001,41,(3):221-238.
74. Brian, G. W., Stranack, K.. The Public Knowledge Project and the Simon Fraser University Library:A Partnership in Open resource and Open Access[J]. The Serials Librarian,2008,55(1):140-167
75. Byrum, j. D. Recommendations for Urgently Needed Improvement of OPAC AND THE Role of theNational Bibliographic Agency in Achieving It[J]. International Cataloguing and BibliopraphicControl,2006,35(4):75-81
76. C Kao，S Tai Liu. Data Envelopment analysis with Missing Data: An Application to UniversityLibraries in Taiwan[J].Journal of the Operational Research Society，2000，51(8):897-905.
77. Campbell JR, Carpenter p, Sneiderman C, Cohn S, Chute CG, Warren J, Phase II evaluation ofclinical coding schemes: completeness, taxonomy, mapping, definitions, and clarity[J]. Journal ofthe American medical informatics association,1997,4(3):238-251
78. Cathy De Rosa, Joanne Cantrell, Diane Cellentani, Janet Hawk, M.B.A., Lillie Jenkins, AlaneWilson. Perceptions of Libraries and Information Resources.OCLC Online Computer LibraryCenter,2005:19-23.
79. Cathy De Rosa,Lorcan Dempsey,Alane Wilson.The2003OCLC Environmental Scan:PatternRecognition:OCLC Online Computer Library Center,2003：69-97.
80. Cavaleri, P.. The use of AJAX in Searching a Bibliopraphic Database: a Case Study of the ItalianBiblioteche Oggi Database [J], Electronic library and Information Systems,2008,42(3):275-285
81. Chandler, Alered D. Scale and scope: The dynamics of industrial capitalism[M]. The Belknap Pressof Harvard University Press,1990
82. Chen, C. CiteSpace II: Detecting and visualizing emerging trends and transient patterns inscientificliterature[J]. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology,2006，57(3)：359-377.
83. Chen, C. Searching for intellectual turning points: Progressive Knowledge Domain Visualization.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America (PNAS)[J],2004，101：5303-5310.
84. Chen, Y.N.. The Impact of Open Access on Library Collection and Service [J]. Bulletin of Libraryand Information Science,2006(57):61-73.
85. Chernik B. E.．Introduction to Library Services[M]．Englewood: Libraries Unlimited, Inc.,1992.1
86. Claudia. J. Gollop. Library and Information Science Education: Preparing Librarians for aMulticultural Society.[J] College&Research Libraries,1999（7）：385-395.
87. Cleveland G. Digital libraries:Definitions, Issues and Challenges[M], UDT Occasional Paper,1998:No.8
88. Competencies for Special Librarians [EB/OL]. http://www.sla.org/content/learn/comp2003/97comp. cfm.[2010-4-14]
89. Colborne D, Summers R and Desjardins J. Client Satisfaction and Utilization of Electronic andTraditional Library Services[J]. Bibliotheca Medica Canadiana1999,20(4):174
90. Cragin M. Foster Mohrhardt: Connecting the traditional world of libraries and the emerging worldof information science[J]. LIBRARY TRENDS,2004(52)4:833-852
91. Cullen, R.2003. Benchmarking: overview and context[C]. Proceedings of World Library andInformation Congress69th IFLA General Conference and Council,17Berlin,1-9.
92. DANUTA A. NITECKI. Program Evaluation in Libraries: Relating Operations and Clients[J].Archival Science (2004)4:17–44
93. Donald F. VITALIANO. Assessing Public Library Efficiency Using Data Envelopmentanalysis[J].Annuals of Public and Cooperative Economies，1998，69(1):107-122.
94. Durrance, J.C. and Fisher, K.E.,‘‘Determining How Libraries and Librarians Help’’[J], LibraryTrends51(4)2003:308–309.
95. Dresang, Eliza T. Intellectual Freedom and Libraries: Complexity and Change in the Twenty-first–century Digital Environment [J]. Library Quarterly,2006,76(2):169-192
96. Dudden, RF. Using Benchmarking, Needs Assessment, Quality Improvement, OutcomeMeasurement, and Library Standards: A How-To-Do-It Manual[M]. New York: Neal Schuman,
2007.
97. Durance, J. C. and Fisher-Pettigrew, K.E., Toward Developing Measures of the Impact of Libraryand Information Services[J]. Reference and User Services Quarterly,2002,42(1):47.
98. Earl M. Knowledge management strategies: toward a taxonomy[J].Journal of managementinformation systems,2001,18(1):215-233
99. Easun, M. S. Identifying envelopment efficiencies in resource management: application of data美国国家农业图书馆ysis to selected school in California [D]. Berkeley: University of California，
1992.
100. Eric Ackermann. LibQUALTM+and the evolution of “Library as Place” at Radford University,2001-2007[EB/OL].[2012-1-11]. http://libraryassessment.org/bm-doc/ackermann.pps.
101. Eric Flower. Competition, Technology, and Planning: Preparing for Tomorrow’s LibraryEnvironment[J]. Information Technology and Libraries, June2004:67-81.
102. F. W. Lancaster，Libraries and the Future. Essays on the Library in the21s’Century[M]. New York:The Haworth Press. Inc1993
103. Flagg, A. T., Allen, D. O., Field, K.,&Thurlow, T. W. Measuring the efficiency of Britishuniversities: a multi-period data envelopment analysis[J]. Education Economics,2004(12):231–249
104. Fusione, Alan E. The history of the National Agricultural Library[J]. Agricultural History,1999:62(2):189-207
105. Gaffney, M.. Involving the Library and Campus Community in Institutional Repository Projects [J].The Serials Librarian,2008,55(4):568-576
106. Gary Hamel，C．K．Frahalad．Competing For the Future[M]．Harvard Business School Press,1997
107. Glanzel, W., Schubert A. A new classification scheme of science field and subfields designed forscientometric evaluation prupose[J]. Scientometrics,2003,56(3):357-367
108. Golany,B. and Y. Roll, An Application Procedure for DEA[J], OMEGA,1989,17(3):237-250..
109. Graham, S. Open Access to Open Publish: National Library of Australia[J].First Monday,2007,12(10):1.
110. Hafiz M. Khalid. The Role of Specialized Knowledge for the Development of ProfessionalCompetency-The Case of LIS[J]. Pakistan Library&Information Science Journal.2011,4:13-16.
111. Hammond C.J. Efficiency in the provision of public services: A Data Envelopment analysis of UKpublic library systems[J]. Applied Economies，2002，34(5):649-657.
112. Hazell J. C., Potter J. N.. Information Practices of Agricultural Scientists[J]. Australian LibraryJournal.1986, June:155
113. Hennen, T., Great American Public Libraries: The2002HAPLR Rankings: The Eagerly Awaited?IfOverdue?Measure of the Nation’s Public Libraries[J], American Libraries,2002:33(9):64–68.
114. Hickey, T.. The Virtual International Authority File: Expanding the Concept of UniversalBibliographic Control[J]. NextSpace,2009(13):18-19
115. IFLA，Libraries@the heart of the Information Society: IFLA Pre-World Summit ConferenceGeneva, November2003：3-4. http://portal. unesco.org/ci/en/ev. php-URL_ID=13455&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html[EB/OL][2012-9-14]
116. IMD. IMD World competitiveness yearbook2010[M]. International Insitute for ManagementDevelopment.2010
117. International Organization for Standardization2003a. ISO11620information and documentation-library performance indicators: amendment1: additional performance des bibliothèques. Genève:ISO.
118. International Organization for Standardization2003b. ISO2789information and documentation-international library statistics. Genève: ISO.
119. Ito, T. The Electronic Resources Search Using Open Access Contents: the OPACand Multi-searchProvided by Jissen Women’s University Library[J]. Journal of Information Processing andManagement,2008,51(3):174-183
120. Jian Wang, Adriene Lim, Local Touch and Global Reach: The Next Generation of Network-levelInformation Discovery and Delivery Services in a Digital Landscape[J]. LibraryManagement.2009(1/2):25-34
121. Jonathan M. Levitt and Mike Thelwall. Citation Levels and Collaboration Within Library andInformation Science[J] Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology,60(3):434–442,2009.
122. K.R. Parker and P.S. Nitse. Improving competitive intelligence for knowledge managementsystems[J]. Proceedings of International Journal of Internet and Enterprise Management.2005,24-45.
123. Kao, C., Hung, H. T. Efficiency analysis of university departments: an empirical study[J]. Omega,2008(36):653–664
124. Katherine Perry. Where are Library Consortia Going? Results of a2009survey [J]. The Journal forthe Serials Community,2009(2):122-130
125. Katz J, Hick D. A systematic view of British Science[J]. Scientometrics,1996,(35):133-154
126. Kersting, A., Pappenberger, K.. Promoting Open Access in Germany as Illustrated by a RecentProject at the Library of the University of Konstanz [J]. OCLC Systems&Services: InternationalDigital Library Perspectives,2009,25(2):105-113.
127. King H, Walls Around the Electronic Library[J], The Electronic library,1993:11(3):165
128. Kimio, H. Current Issues of Library Consortia in International Perspectives: Library Consortia, theStatus Quo and Issues[J]. Journal of Information Science and Technology Association,2005,55(3):108-113
129. Knutsen, U.. Bibliographic Control in the Nordic Countries [J]. IFLA Journal,200632(1):5-12
130. Koehler, A. E. C.. Some thoughts on the Meaning of Open Access for University Library TechnicalServices [J].Serials Review,2006,32(1):17-21.
131. Lam K. T., Chan D.L.H.. Building an Institutional Respository: Sharing Experiences and theHKUST Library[J]. OCLC System&Services: International Digital Library Perspectives,2007,23(3):310-323
132. Lambert, R., Butler, N. The future of European universities. Renaissance or decay?[M]London:Centre for European Reform.(2006)
133. Lange, Bonnie, Nancy Magee, and Steven Montgomery. Does Collaboration Boost StudentLearning?(Case Study)[J]. School Library Journal,2003:4-9.
134. Library Council of New South Wales. Enriching Communities: The Value of Public Libraries inNew South Wales[J]. Australasian Public Libraries and Information Services.2009,22,(1):6-12.
135. Liu, Lewis G. The Economic Behavior of Academic Research Libraries: Toward a Theory[J].Library Trends,2003,51,(3):277-292.
136. Lizanne Payne.Library Storage Facilities and the Future of Print Collections in North America[J].2007OCLC Online Computer Library Center,2007:16-17.
137. Logan, Debra Kay A Measure of Success[J]. Library Media Connection,2010:7.
138. Lougee, Wendy. The Diffuse Library Revisited: Aligning the Library as Strategic Asset[J]. LibraryHi Tech,2009,27,(4):610-623.
139. Lucia Buzzigoli，Antonio Giusti，Alessandro Viviani The Evaluation of University Departments--ACase Study for Firenze[J]. International Advancement of Economic Research2010(16):24–38
140. Lynch, B.P., Measurement and Evaluation of Public Libraries[EB/OL],64th IFLA GeneralConference, August16–21,1998, http://www.ifla.org/IV/ifla64/027-137e.htm (2011-2-13).
141. Machlup, Fritz. Uses, Value, and Benefits of Knowledge[J]. Knowledge: Creation, Diffusion,Utilization,1993,14,(4):448-466.
142. Marie, Kirsten L. From Theory to Practice: A New Teacher-Librarian Tackles LibraryAssessment[J]. Teacher Librarian,2005,33,(2):20-25.
143. Marshall, Joanne G. The Impact of the Hospital Library on Clinical Decision Making: TheRochester Study[J]. Bulletin of the Medical Library Association,1992,80(2):169-178.
144. Martin. Inside and outside lend a balanced view[EB/OL]. http://www.thes.co.uk/worldrandings/story.aspx.2009-11-26.
145. Mary A. L., Sankar A..Collection Evaluation of PSN Colledge of Enginerring and TechnologyLibrary and Pet Engineering Colledge Library in Tirunelveli District[J]. SRELS Journal ofInformation management,2008,45(1):63.
146. McGriff, Nancy, Carl A. Harvey II, and Leslie B. Preddy. Collecting the Data: Monitoring theMission Statement[J]. School Library Media Activities Monthly,2004,20,(6):24-29.
147. Mederios, N.. Transforming: Serials Agents in a Digital World [J]. OCLC Systems and Servies,2005,21(1):8-12
148. Metoyerduran C. Information-seeking behavior of gatekeepers in ethnolinguisticcommunities:overview of a taxonomy[J].2001,13(4):319-346
149. Mezick, Elizabeth M. Return on Investment: Libraries and Student Retention[J]. Journal ofAcademic Librarianship,2007,33,(5):561-566.
150. Mi, Misa. Cultural Competence for Libraries and Librarians in Health Care Institutions[J]. Journalof Hospital Librarianship,2005(5):15-31
151. Michael Buckland. Documentation, Information Science, and Library Science in the USA[J]Information Processing and Management,1996,32(1):63-76.
152. Moreno A, Tadepali R. Assessing academic department efficiency at a public university[J].Managerial and Decision Economics,2002(23):385–397.
153. Moghaddam,G.G., Talawar,V.G., Library Consortia in Developing Countries: An Overview[J].Program: Electronic Library and Information Systems,2009(1):94-104
154. Morris, Anne, Margaret Hawkins, and John Sumsion. Value of Book Borrowing from PublicLibraries: User Perceptions[J]. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science2001,33:191-198.
155. Morrison, H., Waller, A.. Open Access and Evolving Scholarly Communication: An Overviw ofLibrary Advocacy and Commitment, Institutional Repositories, and Publishing in Canada [J].College&Research Libraries News,2008,69(8):486-490.
156. Neal, James G. What Do Users Want? What Do Users Need? W(h)ither the Academic ResearchLibrary?[J], Journal of Library Administration,2009,49,(5):463-468.
157. Nevena Staneheva，Vyara Angelova. Measuring the Efficiency of University Libraries Using DataEnvelopment analysis. INFORUM2004:10th Conference on Professional Information ResoureesPrague[C].Varna，Bulgaria: University of Economies，2004
158. Nitecki, D.A. and Jones, C., Borrow Direct: Its Impact on Service Quality at Yale UniversityLibrary[J], Interlending and Document Supply,2004,32,(3):146–151.
159. Orr, Debbie, and Jacky Cribb. Information Literacy-Is It Worth the Investment[J]. AustralianAcademic and Research Libraries,2003,34,(1):43-51.
160. Payne, P. Conyers, A. Measuring the impact of higher education libraries: the LIRG/SCONULimpact implementation initiative[J]. Library and Information Research,2005,29(91):23-27.
161. Poll, R. Ten years after: Measuring Quality Revised[J]. Performance Measurement and Metrics:2008:9(1):26-37
162. Pastor-Sanchez J.A.，Mendez F. J. M., Rodriguez-Munoz J. V., Advantages of the thesaurusrepresentation using the Simple Knowledge Organization System(SKOS) compared with proposedalternatives[J]. Information research-an international electronic journal,2009,14(4)
163. Paula Ochoa, Leonor Gaspar Pinto. Towards a new model of LIS competences management inPortugal: Implications for the praxis and academia studies[J]. Education for Information,2008,(26):43–54.
164. Pena C. N., Comparative study of library science thesaurus in Spanish[J]. Investigationbibliotecologica,2007,21(42):195-210
165. Phipps SE. Beyond measuring service quality: learning from the voices of the customers, the staff,the processes, and the organization. Library Trends.2001;49(4):635-61.
166. Picco, M. A. Paola.“Multicultural Libraries’ Services and Social Integration: The Case of PublicLibraries in Montreal Canada.”[J]. Public Library Quarterly27, no.1(2008):41-56.
167. Pisanski, J., Zumer, M.. Functional Requirements of Bibliographic Records: An Investigation ofTwo Prototypes [J]. Electronic Library and Information Systems,2007,41(4):400-417
168. Poll, Boekhorst. Measuring Quality: Performance Mearement in Libraries,2007:31. Netherlands:IFLA.
169. Poll, R. and Boekhorst P. Measuring quality: Performance measurement in libraries[M]. TheNetherlands: International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions.2007:127
170. Pors, N.O., Dixon, P. and Robson, H. The employment of quality measures in libraries:culturaldifferences, institutional imperatives and managerial profiles, Performance Measurement&Metrics[J]. The International Journal for Library and Information Services,2004,5(1):20-7.
171. Pung, Caroline, Ann Clarke, and Laurie Patten. Measuring the Economic Impact of the BritishLibrary[J]. New Review of Academic Librarianship,2004,10,(1):79-102
172. Quinn, Brian. Beyond Efficacy: The Exemplar Librarian as a New Approach to ReferenceEvaluation[J]. Illinois Libraries,1994,(76):163-73.
173. Rehman S.U., Majid S., Baker A.B.A. Competences for future library professionals of academiclibraries in Malaysia[J]. Library Review,1997(46):381-393
174. Reichmann G，Reichmann M S. University Library Benchmarking: An International ComparisonUsing DEA[J]. International Journal of Production Economies，2006，100:131-147.
175. Renaud, Robert. Learning to Compete: Competition, Outsourcing, and Academic Libraries[J].Journal of Academic Librarianship,1997,23,(2):85-90.
176. Richard Silberglitt, Philip S. Antón, David R. Howell, Anny Wong. The Global TechnologyRevolution2020, In-Depth analyses:Bio/Nano/Materials/Information Trends, Drivers, Barriers, andSocial Implications. RAND Corporation.2006:177-181
177. Sakalaki, Maria, and Smaragda Kazi. How Much is Information Worth? Willingness to Pay forExpert and Non-Expert Informational Goods Compared to Material Goods in Lay EconomicThinking[J]. Journal of Information Science,2007,33,(3):315-325.
178. Saracevic, T and Kantor PB. Studying the value of library and information services.2.Methodology and taxonomy[J]. Journal of the American society for information science.1997,48(6):543-563
179. Saracevic, Tefko, and Paul B. Kantor. Studying the Value of Library and Information Services. PartI. Establishing a Theoretical Framework[J]. Journal of the American Society for InformationScience,199748,(6):527-542.
180. Sato. Y.. Current Status&Future of Bibliographic Utilities in the Web Age [J]. The Library Journal,2009,103(6):380-383
181. Saunders E S. Drilling the LibQUAL+data for strategic planning[J]. Performance Measurementand Metrics,2008,9(3):160-170.
182. Shalu, B., Sharma, K..Library Consortia: A Step forward the Informatin Society[J]. Trends andStrategic Issues for Libraries in Global Information Society,2008(3):18-19
183. Sharma K.R.，Leung P.，Zane L. Performance measurement of Hawaii state pub1ic libraries: Anapplication of Data Envelopment analysis (DEA)[J].Cultural and Resouree Economies Review，1999，28(2):190-198.
184. Shiang-tai Liu, Mang Chuang. Fuzzy efficiency measures in fuzzy DEA/AR with application touniversity libraries[J]. Expert Systems With Applications，2009，36(2)：1105-1113.
185. Shifra Baruchson-Arbib, Jenny Bronstein. A View to the Future of the Library and InformationScience Profession: A Delphi Study.[J]. Journal of the American Society for Information Scienceand Technology,2005,53(5):397-408
186. Susan Jurow. Core Competencies: Strategic Thinking about the Work We Choose to Do[J]. Journalof Academic Librarian ship,1996(22):300-302
187. Tereas To..Quality Performance Appraisal for Library Staff[C]. In Proceeding of the InternationalConference The Chinese University of Hong Kong. Apr11-12,2007
188. Torkkeli, M., Tuominen, M.: The contribution of technology selection to core competencies[J].International Journal of Production Economics,2002，(77)3：271-284.
189. Tser yieth Chen. A Measurement of the resource utilization efficiency of universitylibraries[J].Production Economies，1997:72-79.
190. V. L. Sauter. Competitive Intelligence System[J]. Handbook on Decision Support Systems2International Handbooks Information System. Springer Berlin Heidelberg,2008:195-210.
191. Van Rann A F J， van Leeuwen Th N. Assessment of the scientific basis of interdisciplinary,applied research: application of bibliometric methods in nutrition and food research[J]. ResearchPolicy，2002，31（4）：614
192. Walsh and Linton. The competence pyramid: a framework for identifying and analyzing firm andindustry competence”[J].Technology analysis and Strategic Management,2001,13(2):165-177
193. Ware C．Information Visualization：Perception for Design．New York：Academic Press，2000.382
194. WEF. The global competitiveness report2010-2011[C]. World Economic Forum.2010
195. Wonsik Shim. Applying DEA Technique to Library Evaluation in Academic ResearchLibraries[J].Library Trends，2003:313-332.
196. Worthington，A. Performance indicators and efficiency measurement in public1ibraries[J].Australian Economies Review，1999，32(l):31-42.
197. Yao Chen，Hiroshi Morita，Joe Zhu. Context Dependent DEA with an Application to Tokyo PublicLibraries[J]. International Journal of Information Technology and Decision Making，2005，4(3):385-394.
198. Yong Peter R. National Digital Library for Agriculture[J]. Quarterly Bulletin of the InternationalAssociation of Agricultural Information Specialists，2004(3):114-120.
2.陈耀胜，李惠珍．论高校图书馆核心竞争力[J]．新世纪图书馆，2006(2)：3-6
3.陈悦，刘则渊，陈劲．科学知识略谈的发展历程[J].科学学研究，2008（３）：449－458
4.邓麦村．中国科学院统计年鉴2010[M]．科学出版社，2011
5.冯文春.基于核心竞争力的高校图书馆评价指标体系研究[J].价值工程，2011（24）：282
6.范红霞，刘泽隆.高校图书馆资源使用效率测定的DEA模型分析[J].情报杂志，2008(4):157-158.
7.符绍宏．创新图书馆信息组织体系的战略思考[J]．图书馆杂志，2006(6)：8-12
8.戈德史密斯N，马凯A L．科学的科学——技术时代的社会[M]．赵红州，蒋国华译．北京：科学出版社，1985．231
9.顾颖.《中国图书馆分类法》第5版医学类表性能测评——兼与《杜威十进分类法》第22版医学类表的比较[J].图书馆理论与实践，2010（6）:52-55
10.郭雪梅.高校图书馆核心竞争力评价体系研究[D].天津大学，2010
11.黄长著.国外人文社会科学管理及政策的若干问题[J]，社会科学管理与评论，2004（4）：74-80
12.黄建年,侯汉清.马克思主义在图书分类法中的列类研究《:中国图书馆分类法》A大类的改造[J].图书情报工作，2010，54（19）：10-14
13.黄金霞，宋文，刘峥，景丽.学科领域本体建设的一个实证研究——兼论杜威分类法与中图分类法的再次比较[J].图书馆杂志.2010(7):21-25
14.蒋永福.图书馆与知识组织：从知识组织的角度理解图书馆学[J].中国图书馆学报，1999（5）
15. J.科尔，S.科尔．科学界的社会分层[M]．北京：华夏出版社，1989．17
16.杰西H谢拉；张丽沙译.图书馆学引论[M].兰州：兰州大学出版社，1986：65-66
17.金婷.基于DEA模型的图书馆效益评价研究[D].成都:成都理工大学，2009.
18.瞿振元，柯炳生.中国农业大学年鉴2009[M].北京:中国农业大学出版社,2010
19.李福华.高等学校资源利用效率研究[M].北京:北京师范大学出版社，2002:7-8.
20.李建霞.省域公共图书馆绩效的DEA测算与评价[J].图书馆论坛，2008，28(4):49-52.
21.李建霞.运用数据包络分析我国高校图书馆服务效率[J].广西示范大学学报，2008，44(5):121-126.
22.刘作义，陈晓田．科学研究评价的性质、作用、方法及程序．科研管理[J]，2002（2）：34
23.毛军.元数据、自由分类法(Folksonomy)和大众的因特网[J].现代图书情报技术.2006(2):1-9
24.孟凡红.中医药图书馆核心竞争力评价研究[D].中国中医科学院，2009
25.孟广均.国外图书馆与信息学教育：调研与思考.变革发展前瞻：第二届中美数字时代图书馆学情报学教育国际研讨会论文集[C].武汉：武汉大学出版社，2007：1-7
26.宁建新.我国企业核心竞争力的组合与构建[J].商业经济与管理，2001，（30）：33-38
27.宁梓煜.公共图书馆核心竞争力的提升研究[D].东北师范大学，2008
28.普通高等学校图书馆评估指标（征求意见稿）.[2011-12-10].http://162.105.140.111/tugongwei/info/detail.asp?lngID=52
29.邱均平，杨瑞仙，丁敬达.世界一流大学与科研机构学科竞争力评价研究报告[M].北京:科学出版社，2009
30.阮冈纳赞著；夏云，王先林等译．图书馆学五定律[M]．北京：书目文献出版社，1988：403
31.时希杰，吴育华，方志刚.高校图书馆核心竞争力评价研究[J].情报科学，2005(23)：1331-1335
32.宋剑祥，新世纪我国图书馆学研究面临的新课题[J]，高校信息工作，2000（3）：14-16
33.孙丽艳，陈浩义，马瑞川.图书馆核心竞争力及其评价指标[J].图书馆建设，2008（8）：31-34
34.滕清秀.运用DEA方法研究高校图书馆的作用研究[J].图书馆研究与工作，2009(3):28-31.
35.王磊.军医大学重点学科核心竞争力整合途径及其整合历程研究[D].第三军医大学硕士学位论文，2004
36.王胜利，白雪梅，何贤英.自由分类法与传统分类法的比较研究[J].情报杂志,2010(29):179-181
37.王毅,陈劲，许庆瑞．企业核心能力：理论溯源与逻辑结构剖析[J]．管理科学学报，2003(3)：24-32，43
38.魏新，张万奇.高等学校资源使用效率评估指标体系闭[J]．.教育与经济，l-5，(2).
39.吴利萍.高校图书馆投入产出相对有效性分析[J].内蒙古科技与经济，2008（4）：123-124.
40.夏忠华.信息工作与企业竞争力[M].北京:企业管理出版社，1997
41.肖珑，李浩凌，徐成. CALIS数字资源评估指标体系及其应用指南[J].大学图书馆学报，2008（3）：2-8.
42.徐革.我国大学图书馆电子资源绩效评价方法及其应用研究[D].西南交通大学，2006
43.杨斌.基于价值链的图书馆核心能力研究[D]，郑州大学，2007
44.杨光.美国图书馆事业发展回顾[J]，九江师专学报(哲学社会科学版)，2001（3）：50-54
45.杨沛霆.新世纪企业十大应变[J].中外管理，2001（增刊）：154-172
46.杨文祥，郑晓雯.图书馆学研究方法与方法论体系影响因素分析--关于21世纪图书馆学方法论体系及相关问题的若干思考之一[J].图书与情报，2007（2）：1-8
47.杨志敏．图书馆核心竞争力的思考[J]．图书馆理论与实践，2003(6)：9-11
48.叶继元.坚守与拓展——数字时代中美图书馆学情报学教育科学定位的战略思考.变革发展前瞻：第二届中美数字时代图书馆学情报学教育国际研讨会论文集[C].武汉：武汉大学出版社，2007：59-81
49.尤江东.图书馆核心价值的再认识——由当前图书馆面临的危机和挑战引出的思考[J]，中国西部科技，2008(10)：92-94
50.曾莉红.图书馆学核心竞争力初探[J].西南民族大学学报(人文社科版)，2007（7）：232-234
51.曾志平.湖南省高校重点学科核心竞争力研究[D].湖南师范大学.2007
52.翟虎渠．中国农业科学院年鉴2010[M]．中国农业科学技术出版社，2011
53.张聪，吕宁．试谈学术评价定量化[J]．江汉石油学院学报（社会科学版），2003（3）：88-89
54.张红霞.图书馆质量评估体系与国际标准[M].北京：国家图书馆出版社，2008.12
55.张俊玲．略论高校图书馆核心竞争力的提升[J]，高校图书馆工作，2007(2)：80-8l，92
56.张黎.高校图书馆效率评价研究[D]．重庆：西南大学，2007
57.张维迎.你的企业有“核心竞争力”吗？[J]招商周刊，2006（6）：68-69
58.张彦．论科学与技术在社会堂上的三个主要区别[J]．南京社会科学，1998（8）：29-34
59.张应祥.图书馆信息服务质量综合评价研究[D].西北工业大学,2006
60.赵燕芳，段宇锋.对数据包络分析方法应用于图书馆效率评价的思考[J].情报理论与实践，2010，33(6):98-102.
61.钟晓玫.图书馆评估论文简析[J].兰台世界，2008（12）：75-76
62. Aaron, Bruce C. Determining the Business Impact of Knowledge Management[J]. PerformanceImprovement,2009,48(4):35-45.
63. Abels, Eileen G., Paul B Kantor, and Tefko Saracevic. Studying the Cost and Value of Library andInformation Services: Applying Functional Cost美国国家农业图书馆ysis to the Library inTransition[J]. Journal of the American Society for Information Science,1996,47,(3):217-227.
64. Ackermann, Eric. Program Assessment in Academic Libraries[J]. Research&Practice inAssessment,2007,1,(2):1-9.
65. Ahtola, A. Anneli. How to Evaluate and Measure the Impact of the Library’s Collection on theLearning Outcome?[C].68th IFLA Council and General Conference.2002.
66. ALA. Core Values Statement.[EB/OL].. http://www.ala.org/ala/aboutala/offices/oif/statementspols/corevalues.cfmaccess[2011-3-02]
67. Andrea Saayman, Jaco Pienaar, Patrick de Pelsmacker, Wilma Viviers, Ludo Cuyvers, Marie-LuceMuller, Marc Jegers.Competitive intelligence: construct exploration, validation and equivalence[J],Aslib Proceedings,2008,60(4):383–411.
68. Ashton, A.. Syndicating Rich Bibliographic metadata using MODS and RSS [J]. Journal of WebLibrarianship,2008,2(1):41-59
69. Audunson, Ragnar. The Public Library as a Meeting-Place in a Multicultural and Digital Context[J].Journal of Documentation,2005,61,(3):429-441.
70. Ballard, Susan. What can Teacher-Librarians do to Promote Their Work and the School LibraryMedia Program? Be Visible, Assess, and Provide Evidence[J]. Teacher Librarian,2008,36,(2):22-23.
71. Berverlee A. French. User Needs and Library Services in Agricultural Sciences[J]. Library Trands.1990, Winter:415-426
72. Bennett, Scott. Libraries and Learning: A History of Paradigm Change[J]. Portal: Libraries and theAcademy,2009,9,(2):181-197.
73. Biggs, John. The Reflective Institution: Assuring and Enhancing the Quality of Teaching andLearning[J]. Higher Education,2001,41,(3):221-238.
74. Brian, G. W., Stranack, K.. The Public Knowledge Project and the Simon Fraser University Library:A Partnership in Open resource and Open Access[J]. The Serials Librarian,2008,55(1):140-167
75. Byrum, j. D. Recommendations for Urgently Needed Improvement of OPAC AND THE Role of theNational Bibliographic Agency in Achieving It[J]. International Cataloguing and BibliopraphicControl,2006,35(4):75-81
76. C Kao，S Tai Liu. Data Envelopment analysis with Missing Data: An Application to UniversityLibraries in Taiwan[J].Journal of the Operational Research Society，2000，51(8):897-905.
77. Campbell JR, Carpenter p, Sneiderman C, Cohn S, Chute CG, Warren J, Phase II evaluation ofclinical coding schemes: completeness, taxonomy, mapping, definitions, and clarity[J]. Journal ofthe American medical informatics association,1997,4(3):238-251
78. Cathy De Rosa, Joanne Cantrell, Diane Cellentani, Janet Hawk, M.B.A., Lillie Jenkins, AlaneWilson. Perceptions of Libraries and Information Resources.OCLC Online Computer LibraryCenter,2005:19-23.
79. Cathy De Rosa,Lorcan Dempsey,Alane Wilson.The2003OCLC Environmental Scan:PatternRecognition:OCLC Online Computer Library Center,2003：69-97.
80. Cavaleri, P.. The use of AJAX in Searching a Bibliopraphic Database: a Case Study of the ItalianBiblioteche Oggi Database [J], Electronic library and Information Systems,2008,42(3):275-285
81. Chandler, Alered D. Scale and scope: The dynamics of industrial capitalism[M]. The Belknap Pressof Harvard University Press,1990
82. Chen, C. CiteSpace II: Detecting and visualizing emerging trends and transient patterns inscientificliterature[J]. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology,2006，57(3)：359-377.
83. Chen, C. Searching for intellectual turning points: Progressive Knowledge Domain Visualization.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America (PNAS)[J],2004，101：5303-5310.
84. Chen, Y.N.. The Impact of Open Access on Library Collection and Service [J]. Bulletin of Libraryand Information Science,2006(57):61-73.
85. Chernik B. E.．Introduction to Library Services[M]．Englewood: Libraries Unlimited, Inc.,1992.1
86. Claudia. J. Gollop. Library and Information Science Education: Preparing Librarians for aMulticultural Society.[J] College&Research Libraries,1999（7）：385-395.
87. Cleveland G. Digital libraries:Definitions, Issues and Challenges[M], UDT Occasional Paper,1998:No.8
88. Competencies for Special Librarians [EB/OL]. http://www.sla.org/content/learn/comp2003/97comp. cfm.[2010-4-14]
89. Colborne D, Summers R and Desjardins J. Client Satisfaction and Utilization of Electronic andTraditional Library Services[J]. Bibliotheca Medica Canadiana1999,20(4):174
90. Cragin M. Foster Mohrhardt: Connecting the traditional world of libraries and the emerging worldof information science[J]. LIBRARY TRENDS,2004(52)4:833-852
91. Cullen, R.2003. Benchmarking: overview and context[C]. Proceedings of World Library andInformation Congress69th IFLA General Conference and Council,17Berlin,1-9.
92. DANUTA A. NITECKI. Program Evaluation in Libraries: Relating Operations and Clients[J].Archival Science (2004)4:17–44
93. Donald F. VITALIANO. Assessing Public Library Efficiency Using Data Envelopmentanalysis[J].Annuals of Public and Cooperative Economies，1998，69(1):107-122.
94. Durrance, J.C. and Fisher, K.E.,‘‘Determining How Libraries and Librarians Help’’[J], LibraryTrends51(4)2003:308–309.
95. Dresang, Eliza T. Intellectual Freedom and Libraries: Complexity and Change in the Twenty-first–century Digital Environment [J]. Library Quarterly,2006,76(2):169-192
96. Dudden, RF. Using Benchmarking, Needs Assessment, Quality Improvement, OutcomeMeasurement, and Library Standards: A How-To-Do-It Manual[M]. New York: Neal Schuman,
2007.
97. Durance, J. C. and Fisher-Pettigrew, K.E., Toward Developing Measures of the Impact of Libraryand Information Services[J]. Reference and User Services Quarterly,2002,42(1):47.
98. Earl M. Knowledge management strategies: toward a taxonomy[J].Journal of managementinformation systems,2001,18(1):215-233
99. Easun, M. S. Identifying envelopment efficiencies in resource management: application of data美国国家农业图书馆ysis to selected school in California [D]. Berkeley: University of California，
1992.
100. Eric Ackermann. LibQUALTM+and the evolution of “Library as Place” at Radford University,2001-2007[EB/OL].[2012-1-11]. http://libraryassessment.org/bm-doc/ackermann.pps.
101. Eric Flower. Competition, Technology, and Planning: Preparing for Tomorrow’s LibraryEnvironment[J]. Information Technology and Libraries, June2004:67-81.
102. F. W. Lancaster，Libraries and the Future. Essays on the Library in the21s’Century[M]. New York:The Haworth Press. Inc1993
103. Flagg, A. T., Allen, D. O., Field, K.,&Thurlow, T. W. Measuring the efficiency of Britishuniversities: a multi-period data envelopment analysis[J]. Education Economics,2004(12):231–249
104. Fusione, Alan E. The history of the National Agricultural Library[J]. Agricultural History,1999:62(2):189-207
105. Gaffney, M.. Involving the Library and Campus Community in Institutional Repository Projects [J].The Serials Librarian,2008,55(4):568-576
106. Gary Hamel，C．K．Frahalad．Competing For the Future[M]．Harvard Business School Press,1997
107. Glanzel, W., Schubert A. A new classification scheme of science field and subfields designed forscientometric evaluation prupose[J]. Scientometrics,2003,56(3):357-367
108. Golany,B. and Y. Roll, An Application Procedure for DEA[J], OMEGA,1989,17(3):237-250..
109. Graham, S. Open Access to Open Publish: National Library of Australia[J].First Monday,2007,12(10):1.
110. Hafiz M. Khalid. The Role of Specialized Knowledge for the Development of ProfessionalCompetency-The Case of LIS[J]. Pakistan Library&Information Science Journal.2011,4:13-16.
111. Hammond C.J. Efficiency in the provision of public services: A Data Envelopment analysis of UKpublic library systems[J]. Applied Economies，2002，34(5):649-657.
112. Hazell J. C., Potter J. N.. Information Practices of Agricultural Scientists[J]. Australian LibraryJournal.1986, June:155
113. Hennen, T., Great American Public Libraries: The2002HAPLR Rankings: The Eagerly Awaited?IfOverdue?Measure of the Nation’s Public Libraries[J], American Libraries,2002:33(9):64–68.
114. Hickey, T.. The Virtual International Authority File: Expanding the Concept of UniversalBibliographic Control[J]. NextSpace,2009(13):18-19
115. IFLA，Libraries@the heart of the Information Society: IFLA Pre-World Summit ConferenceGeneva, November2003：3-4. http://portal. unesco.org/ci/en/ev. php-URL_ID=13455&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html[EB/OL][2012-9-14]
116. IMD. IMD World competitiveness yearbook2010[M]. International Insitute for ManagementDevelopment.2010
117. International Organization for Standardization2003a. ISO11620information and documentation-library performance indicators: amendment1: additional performance des bibliothèques. Genève:ISO.
118. International Organization for Standardization2003b. ISO2789information and documentation-international library statistics. Genève: ISO.
119. Ito, T. The Electronic Resources Search Using Open Access Contents: the OPACand Multi-searchProvided by Jissen Women’s University Library[J]. Journal of Information Processing andManagement,2008,51(3):174-183
120. Jian Wang, Adriene Lim, Local Touch and Global Reach: The Next Generation of Network-levelInformation Discovery and Delivery Services in a Digital Landscape[J]. LibraryManagement.2009(1/2):25-34
121. Jonathan M. Levitt and Mike Thelwall. Citation Levels and Collaboration Within Library andInformation Science[J] Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology,60(3):434–442,2009.
122. K.R. Parker and P.S. Nitse. Improving competitive intelligence for knowledge managementsystems[J]. Proceedings of International Journal of Internet and Enterprise Management.2005,24-45.
123. Kao, C., Hung, H. T. Efficiency analysis of university departments: an empirical study[J]. Omega,2008(36):653–664
124. Katherine Perry. Where are Library Consortia Going? Results of a2009survey [J]. The Journal forthe Serials Community,2009(2):122-130
125. Katz J, Hick D. A systematic view of British Science[J]. Scientometrics,1996,(35):133-154
126. Kersting, A., Pappenberger, K.. Promoting Open Access in Germany as Illustrated by a RecentProject at the Library of the University of Konstanz [J]. OCLC Systems&Services: InternationalDigital Library Perspectives,2009,25(2):105-113.
127. King H, Walls Around the Electronic Library[J], The Electronic library,1993:11(3):165
128. Kimio, H. Current Issues of Library Consortia in International Perspectives: Library Consortia, theStatus Quo and Issues[J]. Journal of Information Science and Technology Association,2005,55(3):108-113
129. Knutsen, U.. Bibliographic Control in the Nordic Countries [J]. IFLA Journal,200632(1):5-12
130. Koehler, A. E. C.. Some thoughts on the Meaning of Open Access for University Library TechnicalServices [J].Serials Review,2006,32(1):17-21.
131. Lam K. T., Chan D.L.H.. Building an Institutional Respository: Sharing Experiences and theHKUST Library[J]. OCLC System&Services: International Digital Library Perspectives,2007,23(3):310-323
132. Lambert, R., Butler, N. The future of European universities. Renaissance or decay?[M]London:Centre for European Reform.(2006)
133. Lange, Bonnie, Nancy Magee, and Steven Montgomery. Does Collaboration Boost StudentLearning?(Case Study)[J]. School Library Journal,2003:4-9.
134. Library Council of New South Wales. Enriching Communities: The Value of Public Libraries inNew South Wales[J]. Australasian Public Libraries and Information Services.2009,22,(1):6-12.
135. Liu, Lewis G. The Economic Behavior of Academic Research Libraries: Toward a Theory[J].Library Trends,2003,51,(3):277-292.
136. Lizanne Payne.Library Storage Facilities and the Future of Print Collections in North America[J].2007OCLC Online Computer Library Center,2007:16-17.
137. Logan, Debra Kay A Measure of Success[J]. Library Media Connection,2010:7.
138. Lougee, Wendy. The Diffuse Library Revisited: Aligning the Library as Strategic Asset[J]. LibraryHi Tech,2009,27,(4):610-623.
139. Lucia Buzzigoli，Antonio Giusti，Alessandro Viviani The Evaluation of University Departments--ACase Study for Firenze[J]. International Advancement of Economic Research2010(16):24–38
140. Lynch, B.P., Measurement and Evaluation of Public Libraries[EB/OL],64th IFLA GeneralConference, August16–21,1998, http://www.ifla.org/IV/ifla64/027-137e.htm (2011-2-13).
141. Machlup, Fritz. Uses, Value, and Benefits of Knowledge[J]. Knowledge: Creation, Diffusion,Utilization,1993,14,(4):448-466.
142. Marie, Kirsten L. From Theory to Practice: A New Teacher-Librarian Tackles LibraryAssessment[J]. Teacher Librarian,2005,33,(2):20-25.
143. Marshall, Joanne G. The Impact of the Hospital Library on Clinical Decision Making: TheRochester Study[J]. Bulletin of the Medical Library Association,1992,80(2):169-178.
144. Martin. Inside and outside lend a balanced view[EB/OL]. http://www.thes.co.uk/worldrandings/story.aspx.2009-11-26.
145. Mary A. L., Sankar A..Collection Evaluation of PSN Colledge of Enginerring and TechnologyLibrary and Pet Engineering Colledge Library in Tirunelveli District[J]. SRELS Journal ofInformation management,2008,45(1):63.
146. McGriff, Nancy, Carl A. Harvey II, and Leslie B. Preddy. Collecting the Data: Monitoring theMission Statement[J]. School Library Media Activities Monthly,2004,20,(6):24-29.
147. Mederios, N.. Transforming: Serials Agents in a Digital World [J]. OCLC Systems and Servies,2005,21(1):8-12
148. Metoyerduran C. Information-seeking behavior of gatekeepers in ethnolinguisticcommunities:overview of a taxonomy[J].2001,13(4):319-346
149. Mezick, Elizabeth M. Return on Investment: Libraries and Student Retention[J]. Journal ofAcademic Librarianship,2007,33,(5):561-566.
150. Mi, Misa. Cultural Competence for Libraries and Librarians in Health Care Institutions[J]. Journalof Hospital Librarianship,2005(5):15-31
151. Michael Buckland. Documentation, Information Science, and Library Science in the USA[J]Information Processing and Management,1996,32(1):63-76.
152. Moreno A, Tadepali R. Assessing academic department efficiency at a public university[J].Managerial and Decision Economics,2002(23):385–397.
153. Moghaddam,G.G., Talawar,V.G., Library Consortia in Developing Countries: An Overview[J].Program: Electronic Library and Information Systems,2009(1):94-104
154. Morris, Anne, Margaret Hawkins, and John Sumsion. Value of Book Borrowing from PublicLibraries: User Perceptions[J]. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science2001,33:191-198.
155. Morrison, H., Waller, A.. Open Access and Evolving Scholarly Communication: An Overviw ofLibrary Advocacy and Commitment, Institutional Repositories, and Publishing in Canada [J].College&Research Libraries News,2008,69(8):486-490.
156. Neal, James G. What Do Users Want? What Do Users Need? W(h)ither the Academic ResearchLibrary?[J], Journal of Library Administration,2009,49,(5):463-468.
157. Nevena Staneheva，Vyara Angelova. Measuring the Efficiency of University Libraries Using DataEnvelopment analysis. INFORUM2004:10th Conference on Professional Information ResoureesPrague[C].Varna，Bulgaria: University of Economies，2004
158. Nitecki, D.A. and Jones, C., Borrow Direct: Its Impact on Service Quality at Yale UniversityLibrary[J], Interlending and Document Supply,2004,32,(3):146–151.
159. Orr, Debbie, and Jacky Cribb. Information Literacy-Is It Worth the Investment[J]. AustralianAcademic and Research Libraries,2003,34,(1):43-51.
160. Payne, P. Conyers, A. Measuring the impact of higher education libraries: the LIRG/SCONULimpact implementation initiative[J]. Library and Information Research,2005,29(91):23-27.
161. Poll, R. Ten years after: Measuring Quality Revised[J]. Performance Measurement and Metrics:2008:9(1):26-37
162. Pastor-Sanchez J.A.，Mendez F. J. M., Rodriguez-Munoz J. V., Advantages of the thesaurusrepresentation using the Simple Knowledge Organization System(SKOS) compared with proposedalternatives[J]. Information research-an international electronic journal,2009,14(4)
163. Paula Ochoa, Leonor Gaspar Pinto. Towards a new model of LIS competences management inPortugal: Implications for the praxis and academia studies[J]. Education for Information,2008,(26):43–54.
164. Pena C. N., Comparative study of library science thesaurus in Spanish[J]. Investigationbibliotecologica,2007,21(42):195-210
165. Phipps SE. Beyond measuring service quality: learning from the voices of the customers, the staff,the processes, and the organization. Library Trends.2001;49(4):635-61.
166. Picco, M. A. Paola.“Multicultural Libraries’ Services and Social Integration: The Case of PublicLibraries in Montreal Canada.”[J]. Public Library Quarterly27, no.1(2008):41-56.
167. Pisanski, J., Zumer, M.. Functional Requirements of Bibliographic Records: An Investigation ofTwo Prototypes [J]. Electronic Library and Information Systems,2007,41(4):400-417
168. Poll, Boekhorst. Measuring Quality: Performance Mearement in Libraries,2007:31. Netherlands:IFLA.
169. Poll, R. and Boekhorst P. Measuring quality: Performance measurement in libraries[M]. TheNetherlands: International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions.2007:127
170. Pors, N.O., Dixon, P. and Robson, H. The employment of quality measures in libraries:culturaldifferences, institutional imperatives and managerial profiles, Performance Measurement&Metrics[J]. The International Journal for Library and Information Services,2004,5(1):20-7.
171. Pung, Caroline, Ann Clarke, and Laurie Patten. Measuring the Economic Impact of the BritishLibrary[J]. New Review of Academic Librarianship,2004,10,(1):79-102
172. Quinn, Brian. Beyond Efficacy: The Exemplar Librarian as a New Approach to ReferenceEvaluation[J]. Illinois Libraries,1994,(76):163-73.
173. Rehman S.U., Majid S., Baker A.B.A. Competences for future library professionals of academiclibraries in Malaysia[J]. Library Review,1997(46):381-393
174. Reichmann G，Reichmann M S. University Library Benchmarking: An International ComparisonUsing DEA[J]. International Journal of Production Economies，2006，100:131-147.
175. Renaud, Robert. Learning to Compete: Competition, Outsourcing, and Academic Libraries[J].Journal of Academic Librarianship,1997,23,(2):85-90.
176. Richard Silberglitt, Philip S. Antón, David R. Howell, Anny Wong. The Global TechnologyRevolution2020, In-Depth analyses:Bio/Nano/Materials/Information Trends, Drivers, Barriers, andSocial Implications. RAND Corporation.2006:177-181
177. Sakalaki, Maria, and Smaragda Kazi. How Much is Information Worth? Willingness to Pay forExpert and Non-Expert Informational Goods Compared to Material Goods in Lay EconomicThinking[J]. Journal of Information Science,2007,33,(3):315-325.
178. Saracevic, T and Kantor PB. Studying the value of library and information services.2.Methodology and taxonomy[J]. Journal of the American society for information science.1997,48(6):543-563
179. Saracevic, Tefko, and Paul B. Kantor. Studying the Value of Library and Information Services. PartI. Establishing a Theoretical Framework[J]. Journal of the American Society for InformationScience,199748,(6):527-542.
180. Sato. Y.. Current Status&Future of Bibliographic Utilities in the Web Age [J]. The Library Journal,2009,103(6):380-383
181. Saunders E S. Drilling the LibQUAL+data for strategic planning[J]. Performance Measurementand Metrics,2008,9(3):160-170.
182. Shalu, B., Sharma, K..Library Consortia: A Step forward the Informatin Society[J]. Trends andStrategic Issues for Libraries in Global Information Society,2008(3):18-19
183. Sharma K.R.，Leung P.，Zane L. Performance measurement of Hawaii state pub1ic libraries: Anapplication of Data Envelopment analysis (DEA)[J].Cultural and Resouree Economies Review，1999，28(2):190-198.
184. Shiang-tai Liu, Mang Chuang. Fuzzy efficiency measures in fuzzy DEA/AR with application touniversity libraries[J]. Expert Systems With Applications，2009，36(2)：1105-1113.
185. Shifra Baruchson-Arbib, Jenny Bronstein. A View to the Future of the Library and InformationScience Profession: A Delphi Study.[J]. Journal of the American Society for Information Scienceand Technology,2005,53(5):397-408
186. Susan Jurow. Core Competencies: Strategic Thinking about the Work We Choose to Do[J]. Journalof Academic Librarian ship,1996(22):300-302
187. Tereas To..Quality Performance Appraisal for Library Staff[C]. In Proceeding of the InternationalConference The Chinese University of Hong Kong. Apr11-12,2007
188. Torkkeli, M., Tuominen, M.: The contribution of technology selection to core competencies[J].International Journal of Production Economics,2002，(77)3：271-284.
189. Tser yieth Chen. A Measurement of the resource utilization efficiency of universitylibraries[J].Production Economies，1997:72-79.
190. V. L. Sauter. Competitive Intelligence System[J]. Handbook on Decision Support Systems2International Handbooks Information System. Springer Berlin Heidelberg,2008:195-210.
191. Van Rann A F J， van Leeuwen Th N. Assessment of the scientific basis of interdisciplinary,applied research: application of bibliometric methods in nutrition and food research[J]. ResearchPolicy，2002，31（4）：614
192. Walsh and Linton. The competence pyramid: a framework for identifying and analyzing firm andindustry competence”[J].Technology analysis and Strategic Management,2001,13(2):165-177
193. Ware C．Information Visualization：Perception for Design．New York：Academic Press，2000.382
194. WEF. The global competitiveness report2010-2011[C]. World Economic Forum.2010
195. Wonsik Shim. Applying DEA Technique to Library Evaluation in Academic ResearchLibraries[J].Library Trends，2003:313-332.
196. Worthington，A. Performance indicators and efficiency measurement in public1ibraries[J].Australian Economies Review，1999，32(l):31-42.
197. Yao Chen，Hiroshi Morita，Joe Zhu. Context Dependent DEA with an Application to Tokyo PublicLibraries[J]. International Journal of Information Technology and Decision Making，2005，4(3):385-394.
198. Yong Peter R. National Digital Library for Agriculture[J]. Quarterly Bulletin of the InternationalAssociation of Agricultural Information Specialists，2004(3):114-120.