Library Technology Guides

Statistical Report for Library.Solution

2012 Survey Results	2011 Survey Results	2010 Survey Results	2009 Survey Results	2008 Survey Results	2007 Survey Results
Product: Library.Solution Response Distribution Statistics Category Responses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Mode Mean Median ILS Satisfaction 106 2 1 5 1 5 8 17 34 33 8 7.38 8 Company Satisfaction 105 1 1 1 5 4 9 10 33 41 9 7.64 8 Support Satisfaction 106 1 1 2 2 3 9 10 34 44 9 7.74 8 Support Improvement 105 1 1 2 26 8 17 17 33 9 7.04 7 Company Loyalty 106 10 4 2 4 5 9 13 13 46 9 6.77 8 Open Source Interest 105 37 11 11 11 8 10 6 4 7 0 2.66 2 Category Total Yes percent Considering new ILS 110 14 12.73% Considering new Interface 110 6 5.45% System Installed on time? 110 102 92.73% Average Collection size: 162637	Product: Library.Solution Response Distribution Statistics Category Responses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Mode Mean Median ILS Satisfaction 130 2 3 3 5 12 33 31 41 9 7.46 8 Company Satisfaction 130 1 1 1 2 10 11 24 34 46 9 7.57 8 Support Satisfaction 130 2 4 3 8 11 20 34 48 9 7.52 8 Support Improvement 129 3 2 3 8 22 9 21 24 37 9 6.83 7 Company Loyalty 129 5 4 4 4 3 9 7 12 25 56 9 7.06 8 Open Source Interest 128 37 11 20 12 10 11 10 8 2 7 0 2.95 2 Category Total Yes percent Considering new ILS 132 20 15.15% Considering new Interface 132 7 5.30% System Installed on time? 132 127 96.21% Average Collection size: 135321	Product: Library.Solution Response Distribution Statistics Category Responses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Mode Mean Median ILS Satisfaction 103 1 7 6 6 7 21 31 24 8 7.09 8 Company Satisfaction 102 1 4 1 4 9 4 21 29 29 8 7.23 8 Support Satisfaction 103 2 2 2 7 2 11 18 19 40 9 7.32 8 Support Improvement 100 4 1 5 3 4 24 10 11 22 16 5 6.13 6 Company Loyalty 103 6 3 8 1 1 7 3 12 16 46 9 6.84 8 Open Source Interest 102 34 9 15 10 3 14 4 4 1 8 0 2.77 2 Category Total Yes percent Considering new ILS 105 15 14.29% Considering new Interface 105 8 7.62% System Installed on time? 105 93 88.57% Average Collection size: 99085	Product: Library.Solution Response Distribution Statistics Category Responses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Mode Mean Median ILS Satisfaction 110 1 2 4 3 6 4 45 26 19 7 7.06 7 Company Satisfaction 110 1 2 6 4 2 7 25 33 30 8 7.27 8 Support Satisfaction 110 1 1 4 3 1 5 12 20 31 32 9 7.23 8 Support Improvement 104 3 2 2 3 6 26 6 19 20 17 5 6.26 7 Company Loyalty 109 4 3 6 1 1 12 4 15 22 41 9 6.94 8 Open Source Interest 110 24 17 11 7 9 16 9 8 4 5 0 3.30 3 Category Total Yes percent Considering new ILS 115 10 8.70% Considering new Interface 115 10 8.70% System Installed on time? 115 97 84.35%	Product: Library.Solution Response Distribution Statistics Category Responses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Mode Mean Median ILS Satisfaction 30 3 2 4 6 7 8 9 7.20 8 Company Satisfaction 30 2 5 1 3 11 8 8 7.33 8 Support Satisfaction 29 1 2 1 3 8 8 6 7 7.07 7 Support Improvement 0 not applicable Company Loyalty 30 1 1 4 2 3 5 14 9 7.50 8 Open Source Interest 30 7 5 4 3 5 3 2 1 0 3.00 2 Category Total Yes percent Considering new ILS 30 1 3.33% Considering new Interface 30 3 10.00% System Installed on time? 30 30 100.00%	Product: Library.Solution Response Distribution Statistics Category Responses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Mode Mean Median ILS Satisfaction 45 1 1 4 4 15 12 8 7 7.16 7 Company Satisfaction 66 1 1 6 6 3 16 18 15 8 7.05 8 Support Satisfaction 66 1 1 1 2 2 8 4 16 15 16 7 6.92 7 Support Improvement 0 not applicable Company Loyalty 65 2 3 2 2 1 5 6 7 20 17 8 6.77 8 Open Source Interest 64 13 9 10 5 6 12 2 4 3 0 3.00 3 Category Total Yes percent Considering new ILS 66 8 12.12% Considering new Interface 66 6 9.09% System Installed on time? 66 1 1.52%

Comments

Discovery Interface--our ILS recently implemented a unified search into our online catalog. If that works the way we think it will, it should met our needs. (Type: Public)

I felt more attention has been given this past year. (Type: Public)

Slightly less than 30% of our collection is comprised of "physical" titles (all formats). The remaining 70% is electronic. (Type: Academic)

We are currently preparing for implementation of TLC's LS 4.2 Release 24 upgrade. Also, we have recently added our branch library (Type: Public)

TLC truly listens to its customers when planning product enhancemetns and upgrades. (Type: School)

We would only migrate to another ILS as a result of joining a consortium. Both of the consortiums under consideration use Evergreen. (Type: Public)

The new OPAC interface LS2pac 2.0 that is soon to be released is a big improvement over the present version. (Type: Academic)

We took over a year making our decision to migrate to TLC four years ago. We are very happy and do not anticipate changing to another vendor for a long time, if ever. (Type: School)

TLC has been a good partner in our library automation processing. Issues that develope are quickly handled or are entered into a process of consideration for implementation in subsequent upgrades. (Type: Public)

We upgraded last year to TLC 4.2 which was a significant change from the previous version. We have not been very pleased with the change. TLC is pushing its web-based circulation module which we have yet to embrace due to its limitations. We will consider to review it but overall are not thrilled with the product and the standard catalog is terrible. (Type: Public)

Our library is the home base for the physical servers that hold the ILS and we are also unofficially the point of first contact if one of the libraries we are in the consortium in needs assistance. We are the county public library and the other libraries in our consortium are the independent school district libraries. We started with 5 libraries total and now have a total of 3 libraries. TLC is just not cost effective anymore for such a small group. (Type: Public)

We just completed a major hardware and system upgrade this year, and it went much better and easier than planned. We had comprehensive support and service from TLC before, throughout, and after the process. Recently they track support requests and do follow-up much more aggressively than before. I really appreciate how responsive and helpful they are overall. (Type: Academic)

The thing I don't like about our LIS is being in a consortium. If we were on our own and had control over own MARC records, I'd have no problem with this system. (Type: School)

We love TLC's customer support and it was the initial reason why we went with it, although economics has eroded response time it has not eroded response quality. (Type: School)

TLC has been the best partnership for our libraries and ILS. They are always helpful. courteous, friendly, and timely in resolving any issues or questions. The best part is the amount of customizing they allow each customer to do to fill their work needs. Truly the best relationship we could ever hope to have with a vendor. (Type: Consortium)

Functionality of special collections does not meet the needs of an academic library, and the system they are focusing development on has NO special collection function. They have not addressed the upgrade requests in the first system. There have been problems with our server; we are hosted. We have had freezing and disconnects, and it has taken months and finally they moved us to a new server to resolve the issue. The reports department is very good at resolving request well and quickly. (Type: Theology)

There are 12 member libraries in our Cooperative. 11 of the libraries are funded and governed by their municipality and board of trustees. The last library is a non-profit, 501C, organization that supports all 12 libraries, provides bookmobile service, and maintains the shared ILS servers and databases. (Type: Public)

Our total item count is up only 2,000 from the last count, but that is because we have done a lot of aggressive weeding in the last year. (Type: Public)

TLC is very customer oriented and has one of the best user conferences I have ever attended. They provide immediate answers to support questions and respond quickly to customer requests and system enhancement requests. (Type: Public)

We sometimes have tech problems and TLC has resoved many of these in a timely manner, so we appreciate their service on this matter. (Type: Public)

Over my 26 year library career, I have worked with at least 5 ILS platforms. Library Solution from The Library Corporation is by FAR the poorest product I have ever come across. Patron OPAC and staff search options are completely substandard, the circulation module design is non-intuitive and requires far too many keystrokes and when we upgraded with them the last time they were unable to migrate important elements of our collected database information WITHIN THEIR OWN SYSTEM. (Type: Public)

Library.Solution has provided an excellent system for us. We particularly like the L.S2 interface and the web-based circulation and acquisition services. (Type: Academic)

We have had the TLC product for over four years and have been very pleased with all aspects of the product and service. (Type: Public)

We are completely satisfied with the product given the limitations of our local available bandwidth. We do not yet have the capacity to take advantage of upgrades that are available from TLC. We consider TLC's support to be exceptionally good and are very grateful to them for the importance they place on our needs. (Type: Public)

If there is a great downsize in funding, we may have to consider open ILS sources, but I have not narrowed it down. We have been very satisfied with our current vendor. We are completing a system-wide weeding project and expect our library collection to be about 39, 400 items at this time. (Type: Public)

Will be migrating to a newly est. consortium in June--[...]. It will be comprised of 5 public libraries with shared database under the leadership and direction from the [...]. A state-wide resource sharing network is planned. (Type: Public)

---

Library Technology Guides is a service provided by Marshall Breeding, independent consultant, author, and speaker.