Extent of Digital Transformation Management in Academic Libraries of the Private Higher Education Institutions (PHEIs) in the Greater Manila Area

This article presents Extent of Digital Transformation Management in Academic Libraries of the Private Higher Education Institutions (PHEIs) in the Greater Manila Area was well managed, as expressed by the participants. User Engagement and Service Innovation ranked first, followed by Staff Training and Capacity Building, Strategic Planning, while Monitoring and Evaluation and Technology Adoption appeared as the areas with the most room for relative development.
Across all five dimensions, leadership commitment, use of cloud-based systems, encouragement of professional development, use of digital platforms for user engagement, and evidence-based continuous improvement were consistently the highest rated indicators. Conversely, the presence of a formal digital library roadmap, availability of funding for digital innovation and staff training, introduction of AI-enhanced services, and systematic review using defined standards registered the lowest scores, indicating gaps in formalization, sustainable financing, and advanced service innovation.
Examined dimension by dimension, the findings revealed a consistent pattern of well-managed practice accompanied by specific, actionable areas for strengthening, providing a granular evidentiary basis for the framework developed in this study.
Along User Engagement and Service Innovation, which ranked first (M = 4.17), the use of social media and digital platforms for user engagement was the highest rated indicator (M = 4.44, Extensively Managed), while the introduction of personalized or AI-enhanced library services registered the lowest mean (M = 3.80), signaling that libraries have engaged users effectively through accessible channels but have yet to fully integrate advanced, technology-driven service innovations.
Along Staff Training and Capacity Building, which ranked second (M = 4.14), the encouragement to attend seminars, workshops, and webinars was the highest rated indicator (M = 4.38, Extensively Managed), reflecting strong institutional support for continuous professional development, while the availability of dedicated funding for staff training remained comparatively lower, indicating that the commitment to capacity building is not always matched by sustained financial provision.
Along Strategic Planning, which ranked third (M = 4.11), leadership commitment to sustaining digital transformation initiatives ranked highest (M = 4.26, Extensively Managed), while the presence of a formal digital library roadmap or master plan registered the lowest mean (M = 3.90), confirming that strong leadership intent has not yet been fully translated into formalized, documented long-term planning frameworks.
Along Monitoring and Evaluation, which ranked fourth (M = 4.09), the continuous improvement of policies, systems, and services based on evaluation findings was the highest rated indicator (M = 4.22, Extensively Managed), while the regular review of digital library services using defined standards or indicators registered the lowest mean (M = 3.90), indicating that the formalization and standardization of evaluation systems remain underdeveloped.
Along Technology Adoption, which ranked fifth (M = 4.07), management was still well-managed but lowest among the dimensions, with the use of cloud-based systems rated highly while the availability of funding for digital innovation and the introduction of AI-enhanced services registered among the lowest indicators, locating the principal constraint on technology adoption in sustainable financing and advanced innovation rather than in basic technological capability.
Taken together, these results indicate that the management of digital transformation across accredited PHEIs in the Greater Manila Area is strongest where it depends on leadership commitment, professional development, and user-facing engagement, and comparatively weaker where it depends on formal documentation, sustained financing, standardized evaluation, and advanced service innovation.

Digital Transformation, Academic Libraries, Private Higher Education Institutions, Library 4.0, Strategic Planning.

1. Aditya, B. R., Ferdiana, R., & Kusumawardani, S. S. (2022). Identifying and prioritizing barriers to digital transformation in higher education: A case study in Indonesia. International Journal of Innovation Science, 14(3/4), 445–460 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Afolabi, O. E. et al. (2024). Adoption of digital transformation strategies for library services by private university libraries in Osun State, Nigeria. Samaru Journal of Information Studies, 24(1). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Aldoseri, A., Al-Khalifa, K.N. & Hamouda, A.M. (2024). AI-Powered Innovation in Digital Transformation: Key Pillars and Industry Impact. Sustainability 2024, 16, 1790. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16051790 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Begnini, S., et al. (2024). The influence of digital transformation and implementation barriers on innovation in Brazilian micro, small, and medium enterprises. Small Business International Review, 8(1), Article e660. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Benson, O. et al. (2022). Revolutionary changes in librarianship and the need for strategic planning for sustainable transformation of academic libraries. Library Philosophy and Practice (e-journal), 7263 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Biswas, G., & Paul, D. (2019). An evaluative study on the open source digital library softwares for institutional repository: Special reference to Dspace and greenstone digital library. African Journal of Library and Information Science, 5(6), 1–10. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Castiglione, J. (2006). Organizational learning and transformational leadership in the library environment. Library Management, 27(4/5), 289–299. https://doi.org/10.1108/01435120610668223 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Chaudhari, Y. & Bhoye, H. (2024). The Application of Information and Communication Technology in Libraries: Library Services, Effects and Challenges. International Journal of Technology, 14, 38-44. 10.52711/2231-3915.2024.00005. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. CHED. 2020. Philippine Higher Education Digital Transformation Framework. Commission on Higher Education. https://documents.worldbank.org/en/publication/documents-reports/documentdetail/099925001062333685 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. CHED. (2021). CHED Memorandum Order No. 22, series of 2021: Minimum requirements for libraries of higher education institutions common to all programs. Commission on Higher Education. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Concha, K., Palacios, C. & Alfaro, J. (2024). Use of artificial intelligence in libraries a systematic review, 2019-2023. South African Journal of Library and Information Science, 90. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Corpuz, D. A. (2020). Library Resources and Functional Effectiveness of An Academic Library: Meeting the Challenges of the Digital Age. Humanities & Social Sciences Reviews, 8(4), 238–245. https://doi.org/10.18510/hssr.2020.8425 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2018). Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research (3rd ed.). Sage Publications.Creswell, J. W, and Creswell-Baez, J. (2022) 30 Essential Skills For the Qualitative Researcher. Sage Publications Inc. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika, 16(3), 297–334. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02310555 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Dar Juan, E. J. F., & Buenrostro, I. S. (2023). Overcoming challenges in teaching and mentorship in LIS research education in the Philippines. Philippine Journal of Librarianship and Information Studies, 43(2), 1–4. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Daudi, J. R. & Majanja, M. (2024). Assessing Digital Proficiency Requirements for Library and Information Services Professionals (LIS) in the Digital Age. Library Philosophy and Practice (e-journal), 8147. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Dener, C., Nii-Aponsah, H., Ghunney, L. E., & Johns, K. D. (2021). GovTech Maturity Index: The State of Public Sector Digital Transformation. World Bank. https://doi.org/10.1596/978-1-4648-1765-6 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Depano–Panganiban, C. P. (2023). Designing Learning Commons in Academic Libraries. PAARL Research Journal, 9(1 - Special Anniversary Issue), 127-149. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Dorado, D. A. (2024). Exploring the landscape of librarianship in the Philippines: Establishing the profession's population parameter estimates. https://doi.org/10.1177/09610006241240485 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Fraenkel, J. R., et al. (2019). How to design and evaluate research in education (10th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions (IFLA). (2023). IFLA trend report 2023: Navigating the evolving information landscape. The Hague: IFLA. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Khalil, O., Khalil, H., Khalil, N. (2024). Academic libraries' knowledge sharing and service innovation: The mediating role of management and IT innovations. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 50(1), 102832. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Khan, S. A., & Weber, N. M. (2023). Staff development approaches for digital transformation. College & Research Libraries, 84(2), 321-342. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Kraus, S., et.al. (2021). Digital Transformation: an Overview of the Current State of the Art of Research. SAGE Open, 11(3), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440211047576 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. Lagas, S., & Isip, J. (2023). Challenges to Digital Services in Philippine Academic Libraries. Philippine Journal of Librarianship and Information Studies, 43(1), 27–38. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. LIBER. (2023). LIBER strategy 2023-2027: Powering sustainable knowledge in the digital age. The Hague: LIBER. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. Malpas, C., Schonfeld, R., Stein, R., Dempsey, L. & Marcum, D. (2018). University Futures, Library Futures: Aligning Library Strategies with Institutional Directions. Dublin, OH: OCLC Research. https://doi.org/10.25333/WS5K-DD86. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

28. Maxwell, J. A. (2016). Expanding the history and range of mixed methods research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 10(1), 12–27. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689815571132 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

29. Mbambo-Thata, B., & Tang, J. (2023). Leadership domains in academic library digital transformation: A meta-analysis of empirical studies. Library & Information Science Research, 45(1), 101178. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

30. Meylani, R. (2024). A Comparative Analysis of Traditional and Modern Approaches to Assessment and Evaluation in Education. Bati Anadolu Egitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 15. 10.51460/baebd.1386737. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

31. Ojobor, R. C., Okafor, V. N., & Ugwuanyi, R. N. (2025). Leveraging Innovative Technologies for Improved Library Practices in the Digital Era: The Nigerian Perspective. Information Technology and Libraries, 44(2). http://dx.doi.org/10.5860/ital.v44i2.16767 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

32. Oliveira, C. & Favaretto, J. (2025). Leadership styles and digital transformation: a literature review. Observatorio de la Economia Latinoamericana, 23, e9544. 10.55905/oelv23n4-071. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

33. Pradana, M. & Nuryuliani, N. (2023). Digital transformation and organizational performance: The mediating role of feedback-driven systems. Journal of Information Systems and Technology Management, 20, e2023003. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

34. Rahman, A., & Cunningham, S. J. (2023). Perceptions of digital transformation barriers: Comparative analysis of library managers and staff in private higher educational institutions. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science, 55(1), 146-162. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

35. Rosenberg, D. & Kotschy, K. (2020). Monitoring and evaluation as a strategic tool for digital transformation in academic institutions. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 42(4), 378–393 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

36. Sagar, M. (2021). Singapore's National Library Board plans to transform libraries into digital learning hubs. Retrieved from https://opengovasia.com/2021/03/04/singapores-national-library-board-plans-to-transform-libraries-into-digital-learning-hubs/ [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

37. Sandhu, G. (2022). The role of academic libraries in the digital transformation of the universities. https://doi.org/10.1109/ETTLIS.2018.8485258. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

38. Shakeel, A. M. & Rubina, B. (2017). Digital competencies for developing and managing digital libraries: An investigation from university librarians in Pakistan. The Electronic Library, 35(3), 573-597. https://doi.org/10.1108/EL-06-2016-0133 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

39. Singh, P. K. & Gangopadhyay, S. (2017). Digital Divide in Higher Education: Role of Academic Libraries to Bridge the Gap. Vaichariki, 7(4), 35-40. (ISSN: 2249-8907). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

40. Spina, S. (2023). Artificial Intelligence in archival and historical scholarship workflow: HTS and ChatGPT [Preprint]. arXiv. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

41. Sudirjo, F. et al. (2024). The Effect of Digital Transformation, User Experience, and User Interface on Customer Loyalty in Technology Startups in Bandung. West Science Interdisciplinary Studies, 2(9). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

42. Tammaro, A. M. (2024). Editorial: Whether a digital library qualifies as a ‘library’. Digital Library Perspectives, 40, 157-159. 10.1108/DLP-05-2024-146. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

43. Tavakol, M. & Dennick, R. (2011). Making sense of Cronbach’s alpha. International Journal of Medical Education, 2, 53–55. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

44. Tewell, E., & Mullins, K. (2024). Technology adoption patterns in private academic libraries: Portfolio approaches and implementation strategies. College & Research Libraries, 85(3), 312-329. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

45. Uzwyshyn, R. (2021). Digital transformation in academic libraries: Structured training and staff competence development. Journal of Library Administration, 61(5), 555–571. https://doi.org/10.1080/01930826.2021.1908717 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

46. Verma, M. K., & Abrizah, A. (2023). Strategic planning implementation assessment: Development and validation of an instrument measuring digital transformation readiness in academic libraries. Library & Information Science Research, 45(2), 101152. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

47. Villanueva, M. E. & Marcial, D. E. (2023). Experiences in the Implementation of a Virtual Library during the Coronavirus Pandemic. PAARL Research Journal, 9(1 - Special Anniversary Issue), 111-126. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

48. Wagas, H. B., Kilag, O. K. T., Pareja, J. Y. C. & Canonigo, K. (2024). Librarians in Transition: Navigating Challenges in the Philippines. IMJRISE, 1(6). https://risejournals.org/index.php/imjrise [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

49. Wang, M., & Vorster, J. (2022). Strategic planning for digital transformation in private academic libraries: Implementation levels and quality indicators. Library Management, 43(8/9), 541-557. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

50. The World Bank. (2022). Digital Transformation of Philippine Higher Education. Report No: AUS0002964. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

51. Yadukrishnan, A., Kumar, A. & Kingsley, I. (2023). More user engagement, better for libraries: Proposing a framework for social Media integration in libraries. Information Development. 10.1177/02666669231191074. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

52. Yefimov, I., & Moghaddasi, H. (2023). The engagement-innovation cycle: Case studies of exemplar service innovation in private academic libraries. College & Research Libraries, 84(3), 459-480. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• Smart Iot Device for Weather And Health
• Merlarchive: A Web-Based Academic Hub for UDM With AI-Powered Natural Language Processing
• Enhanced Social Network Security System: Integrating Biometric Authentication for Improved User Verification and Privacy Protection
• Smart Budget Allocation in Public Policy: A Data-Driven Approach for Equitable Resource Distribution
• Decision Support System for Faculty Selection, Promotion, and Reclassification Using Predictive Analytics