Library Technology Guides

Blog content

Profile


Photo of Marshall Breeding author of

Name: Marshall Breeding

Title: Publisher

Organization: Library Technology Guides


GuidePosts

Perspective and commentary by Marshall Breeding

Blog Archive subscribe to GuidePosts via RSS


Perceptions 2009: An International Survey of Library Automation

I have posted the results the third annual survey of data collected on how libraries rate their current integrated library system, the company involved, and the quality of customer support. The survey also aims to gather data regarding attitudes regarding interest levels in open source ILS products. Perceptions 2009: an international survey of library automation gives the general conclusions and presents all the statistical results derived from the survey. As usual, some of the most interesting and valuable information lies in the comments offered by responders.


Top survey findings

  • Products and companies focusing on smaller libraries and narrower niches generally receive higher perception scores than those involved with larger, more complex organizations that and that serve multiple types of libraries.
  • Apollo, a system adopted exclusively by small public libraries topped the charts in ILS, company, support perceived satisfaction and in company loyalty, following the formula for success mentioned above. Most libraries adopting Apollo have migrated from abandoned products such as Winnebago Spectrum and Athena.
  • Libraries operating AGent Verso from Auto-Graphics and Polaris from Polaris Library Systems continue to receive extremely high scores, consistent with previous editions of this survey.
  • Companies and products serving large and complex library organizations and diverse library types receive a broader range of responses, and fall into a middle tier of rankings. Yet where they fall within this middle ground represents important differences. Millennium from Innovative Interfaces, Library.Solution from The Library Corporation, and Evergreen as supported by Equinox Software came out as very strong performers at the top of this middle tier.
  • Companies supporting proprietary ILS products receive generally higher satisfaction scores than companies involved with open source ILS. Evergreen, primarily supported by Equinox Software fell into the middle tier of satisfaction ratings. LibLime received especially poor marks in customer satisfaction; libraries implementing Koha independently gave themselves high ratings.
  • Except for the libraries already using an open source ILS, the survey reflected low levels of interest, even when the company rates their satisfaction with their current proprietary ILS and its company as poor. Other than libraries already running an open source ILS, and for Winnebago Spectrum and Athena, the mode score from libraries using proprietary ILS products was 0. These results fail to confirm the trend of broad-based interest in open source ILS; rather we observe a minority of early adopters voicing strong support.

Here is a sample table from the report:

Statistics related to the question: How satisfied is the library with your current Integrated Library System (ILS)?

Satisfaction Score for ILS Response Distribution Statistics
CompanyResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedianStd Dev
Apollo34 6 10 18 98.359 1.37
AGent VERSO71 1 1 5 16 27 21 87.838 0.95
Polaris92 1 1 2 1 1 13 52 21 87.798 0.83
Koha -- Independent26 4 5 10 7 87.778 1.57
OPALS41 1 1 1 1 12 7 18 97.668 1.41
Atriuum55 1 1 3 4 13 14 19 97.538 0.13
Millennium343 1 7 10 31 32 109 102 51 77.137 0.43
Library.Solution110 1 2 4 3 6 4 45 26 19 77.067 0.67
Evergreen49 1 10 5 21 6 6 76.767 1.00
Circulation Plus38 2 2 1 2 2 1 3 7 9 9 86.397 1.30
Spydus22 1 1 1 1 4 7 6 1 76.367 1.28
ALEPH 500133 2 1 1 7 7 16 27 37 31 4 76.297 0.61
Virtua21 1 1 1 5 8 4 1 76.297 1.31
Koha -- LibLime49 5 1 4 4 9 14 9 3 76.127 1.00
Symphony (Unicorn)304 3 5 5 9 16 62 56 97 44 7 76.076 0.46
Horizon192 3 5 7 7 13 24 25 69 32 7 76.067 0.51
Voyager164 8 10 9 31 39 41 22 4 75.916 0.23
Athena22 1 3 2 1 1 4 4 2 4 65.736 0.64
Winnebago Spectrum33 3 1 3 1 5 6 3 5 5 1 54.915 1.22

Just as I did for the previous editions survey, I created an interactive tool for viewing the statistical summaries and comments. The main tables in the article show statistics only for those products that had more than 20 survey responses. You can use the ILS Product Report to view the statistics on any of the products mentioned in the survey and to read the comments about that system, even if the number of responses did not meet the threshold. The comments that display have been edited to remove any text that identifies the individual or institution, preserving the anonymity of the responders. The narrative data in the comments largely corroborate the statistical responses and makes for interesting reading.

Marshall Breeding Jan 22, 2010 12:00:16 Link to this thread

Login or register to leave a comment.



Archive

Jul 2014 (3 posts)
Jun 2014 (1 post)
Apr 2014 (1 post)
Mar 2014 (1 post)
Feb 2014 (1 post)
Dec 2013 (1 post)
Nov 2013 (3 posts)
Aug 2013 (2 posts)
Jun 2013 (1 post)
Apr 2013 (1 post)
Jan 2013 (2 posts)
Dec 2012 (1 post)
Nov 2012 (1 post)
Oct 2012 (1 post)
Sep 2012 (1 post)
Aug 2012 (1 post)
Jun 2012 (2 posts)
May 2012 (3 posts)
Mar 2012 (1 post)
Feb 2012 (1 post)
Jan 2012 (2 posts)
Dec 2011 (3 posts)
Nov 2011 (3 posts)
Oct 2011 (1 post)
Aug 2011 (1 post)
Jul 2011 (1 post)
May 2011 (1 post)
Apr 2011 (1 post)
Mar 2011 (3 posts)
Jan 2011 (1 post)
Dec 2010 (2 posts)
Nov 2010 (2 posts)
Sep 2010 (1 post)
Aug 2010 (2 posts)
Jul 2010 (1 post)
Jun 2010 (2 posts)
May 2010 (1 post)
Mar 2010 (2 posts)
Feb 2010 (1 post)
Jan 2010 (3 posts)
Dec 2009 (2 posts)
Nov 2009 (2 posts)
Oct 2009 (3 posts)
Sep 2009 (2 posts)
Aug 2009 (1 post)
Jul 2009 (1 post)
Jun 2009 (1 post)
May 2009 (1 post)
Apr 2009 (2 posts)
Mar 2009 (1 post)
Feb 2009 (1 post)
Jan 2009 (2 posts)
Dec 2008 (1 post)
Oct 2008 (2 posts)
Sep 2008 (2 posts)
Aug 2008 (5 posts)
Jul 2008 (1 post)
Jun 2008 (4 posts)
May 2008 (2 posts)
Apr 2008 (3 posts)
Mar 2008 (2 posts)
Feb 2008 (2 posts)
Jan 2008 (2 posts)
Dec 2007 (2 posts)
Nov 2007 (3 posts)
Oct 2007 (3 posts)
Sep 2007 (1 post)
Aug 2007 (3 posts)
Jul 2007 (1 post)