Library Technology Guides

Documents, Databases, News, and Commentary

Statistical Report for Voyager

2013 Survey Results

2012 Survey Results

2011 Survey Results

2010 Survey Results

2009 Survey Results

2008 Survey Results

2007 Survey Results

Product: Voyager		Response Distribution										Statistics
Category	Responses	0	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	Mode	Mean	Median
ILS Satisfaction	112	1	1	3	6	7	11	21	42	19	1	7	6.15	7
ILS Functionality	112		2	4	3	6	16	24	32	22	3	7	6.20	7
Print Functionality	112				2	4	4	12	31	43	16	8	7.31	8
Electronic Functionality	111	1	6	14	17	7	17	21	18	7	3	6	4.80	5
Company Satisfaction	110	1	2	3	7	7	11	21	42	14	2	7	6.02	7
Support Satisfaction	110		5	2	5	10	14	26	31	15	2	7	5.86	6
Support Improvement	109		2	1	8	7	56	10	12	9	4	5	5.39	5
Company Loyalty	110	2	1	2	8	5	15	23	24	17	13	7	6.21	6
Open Source Interest	110	27	12	13	6	9	15	12	9	4	3	0	3.28	3

Category	Total	Yes	percent
Considering new ILS	114	58	50.88%
Considering new Interface	114	29	25.44%
System Installed on time?	114	102	89.47%

Average Collection size:		1534747

Type	Count
Public	0
Academic	85
School	0
Consortia	0
Special	0

Size Category	Count
[1] Under 10,000	2
[2] 10,001-100,000	21
[3] 100,001-250,000	25
[4] 250,001-1,000,000	29
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,000	24
[6] over 10,000,001	3

Product: Voyager		Response Distribution										Statistics
Category	Responses	0	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	Mode	Mean	Median
ILS Satisfaction	171	4	1	8	11	13	21	37	55	20	1	7	5.75	6
ILS Functionality	171	1	3	8	15	10	29	28	43	30	4	7	5.81	6
Print Functionality	0											0	5.81
Electronic Functionality	0											0	5.81
Company Satisfaction	169	3	3	6	11	16	22	29	54	25		7	5.76	6
Support Satisfaction	168	4	5	5	13	17	23	33	45	22	1	7	5.57	6
Support Improvement	162	8	5	1	4	28	65	15	24	10	2	5	5.01	5
Company Loyalty	170	7	3	6	12	12	33	20	38	14	25	7	5.81	6
Open Source Interest	167	32	17	19	16	9	32	16	12	5	9	0	3.59	3

Category	Total	Yes	percent
Considering new ILS	172	84	48.84%
Considering new Interface	172	56	32.56%
System Installed on time?	172	154	89.53%

Average Collection size:		1439754

Type	Count
Public	0
Academic	136
School	0
Consortia	0
Special	5

Size Category	Count
[1] Under 10,000	6
[2] 10,001-100,000	22
[3] 100,001-250,000	39
[4] 250,001-1,000,000	53
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,000	30
[6] over 10,000,001	4

Product: Voyager		Response Distribution										Statistics
Category	Responses	0	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	Mode	Mean	Median
ILS Satisfaction	154	1		4	17	5	18	27	56	22	4	7	6.07	7
ILS Functionality	152		1	8	16	7	16	26	44	31	3	7	6.00	7
Print Functionality	0											0	6.00
Electronic Functionality	0											0	6.00
Company Satisfaction	154	1	1	4	10	12	16	22	54	27	7	7	6.21	7
Support Satisfaction	152	3		7	11	5	18	23	47	30	8	7	6.16	7
Support Improvement	149	2	2	4	7	13	62	16	19	15	9	5	5.52	5
Company Loyalty	154	5	2		12	10	30	17	34	24	20	7	6.10	7
Open Source Interest	152	25	16	16	16	12	21	17	13	10	6	0	3.79	4

Category	Total	Yes	percent
Considering new ILS	154	60	38.96%
Considering new Interface	154	62	40.26%
System Installed on time?	154	139	90.26%

Average Collection size:		1940682

Type	Count
Public	0
Academic	117
School	0
Consortia	0
Special	4

Size Category	Count
[1] Under 10,000	8
[2] 10,001-100,000	19
[3] 100,001-250,000	36
[4] 250,001-1,000,000	51
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,000	23
[6] over 10,000,001	6

Product: Voyager		Response Distribution										Statistics
Category	Responses	0	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	Mode	Mean	Median
ILS Satisfaction	123			4	3	10	25	25	42	13	1	7	6.01	6
ILS Functionality	0											0	6.01
Print Functionality	0											0	6.01
Electronic Functionality	0											0	6.01
Company Satisfaction	123		1	5	5	11	18	30	39	13	1	7	5.90	6
Support Satisfaction	120		4	4	4	11	21	32	23	20	1	6	5.79	6
Support Improvement	118		3	3	6	11	52	14	18	11		5	5.33	5
Company Loyalty	121	2	3	4	5	13	27	15	28	17	7	7	5.77	6
Open Source Interest	120	11	16	16	14	9	18	9	8	9	10	5	4.07	4

Category	Total	Yes	percent
Considering new ILS	124	40	32.26%
Considering new Interface	124	64	51.61%
System Installed on time?	124	106	85.48%

Average Collection size:		1095582

Type	Count
Public	1
Academic	97
School	0
Consortia	0
Special	2

Size Category	Count
[1] Under 10,000	0
[2] 10,001-100,000	21
[3] 100,001-250,000	27
[4] 250,001-1,000,000	37
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,000	17
[6] over 10,000,001	2

Product: Voyager		Response Distribution										Statistics
Category	Responses	0	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	Mode	Mean	Median
ILS Satisfaction	164			8	10	9	31	39	41	22	4	7	5.91	6
ILS Functionality	0											0	5.91
Print Functionality	0											0	5.91
Electronic Functionality	0											0	5.91
Company Satisfaction	162	1	1	7	12	17	23	35	45	19	2	7	5.73	6
Support Satisfaction	162	1	3	11	15	12	20	26	44	25	5	7	5.72	6
Support Improvement	153	2	5	8	8	18	54	17	17	18	6	5	5.27	5
Company Loyalty	160	11	5	5	11	14	22	20	42	17	13	7	5.51	6
Open Source Interest	164	24	19	23	11	8	23	16	19	12	9	0	3.97	4

Category	Total	Yes	percent
Considering new ILS	164	31	18.90%
Considering new Interface	164	89	54.27%
System Installed on time?	164	142	86.59%

Product: Voyager		Response Distribution										Statistics
Category	Responses	0	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	Mode	Mean	Median
ILS Satisfaction	87			6	5	8	5	23	21	17	2	6	6.01	6
ILS Functionality	0											0	6.01
Print Functionality	0											0	6.01
Electronic Functionality	0											0	6.01
Company Satisfaction	87	1	1	5	9	5	16	15	23	11	1	7	5.59	6
Support Satisfaction	87	1	4	3	10	5	13	19	14	14	4	6	5.57	6
Support Improvement	0	not applicable
Company Loyalty	87	5	3	10	7	7	12	11	13	13	6	7	5.14	5
Open Source Interest	86	10	7	10	6	4	14	7	10	4	14	5	4.66	5

Category	Total	Yes	percent
Considering new ILS	87	19	21.84%
Considering new Interface	87	40	45.98%
System Installed on time?	87	83	95.40%

Product: Voyager		Response Distribution										Statistics
Category	Responses	0	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	Mode	Mean	Median
ILS Satisfaction	83		1	3	12	3	17	19	22	5	1	7	5.51	6
ILS Functionality	0											0	5.51
Print Functionality	0											0	5.51
Electronic Functionality	0											0	5.51
Company Satisfaction	110	1	5	9	14	13	17	24	21	5	1	6	4.93	5
Support Satisfaction	108	4	5	9	13	14	14	18	19	10	2	7	4.88	5
Support Improvement	0	not applicable
Company Loyalty	105	16	2	11	13	9	25	9	8	6	6	5	4.15	5
Open Source Interest	107	10	8	12	12	13	12	15	12	6	7	6	4.35	4

Category	Total	Yes	percent
Considering new ILS	111	24	21.62%
Considering new Interface	111	53	47.75%
System Installed on time?	111	1	0.90%

Comments

Our library is migrating to the Alma/Primo system in December. We are managed by the [...] and they are connected to the main library at the University, which is now a part of the [...] . Everyone in the [...] is going with this new system, which means we will be also. (Type: Law)

- (Type: Academic)

The [...] system is considering issuing an RFP for a shared, unified library management system that would go beyond the ILS. Our campus/library would likely migrate to that shared system should it come to pass. It might help to add a question to next year's survey to capture this sort of information or consider redefining ILS to incorporate the coming generation of unified platforms. (Type: Academic)

We are dissatisfied with the level of support from our current vendor (ExL), but we are considering Alma because we feel this would be the simplest migration (rather than moving to another vendor altogether). However, no product (Alma, WMS, Intota) seems perfect; they all have disadvantages. We feel we will choose whichever offers the fewest disadvantages (which hopefully would be better than sticking with a traditional ILS, at least). (Type: )

Some staff here continue to work around or outside of the system, resulting in more work and dissatisfaction which is not exactly the fault of the ILS. (Type: Academic)

Due to lack of money, our library subscribes to very few electronic resources. I would have liked a "not applicable" option for question #4, as we don't subscribe to enough electronic resources to really judge Voyager's capabilities. (Type: State)

We are dropping Metalib in December and running our database A-Z and databases by subject off of libguides. We have enough search tools with Primo. (Type: Academic)

As of Jan 2013 we had 736,650 bibliographic records and 699,278 items. The difference are materials that are electronic. (Type: Academic)

We're currently part of the [...] so many of the ILS change decisions are starting there. (Type: Corporate)

We are just in the process of migrating from Voyager and the Serials Solutions products to Alma and Primo - go live is 2 weeks away. Questions above were answered on our existing systems (Type: Academic)

We are currently trying to secure funding from our administration to change our ILS. (Type: Academic)

There are an additional 100,000 +eBooks available to our patrons (Type: Academic)

We are in the process of Implementing OCLC's WorldShare Management System. Implementation should be finished in May or June, 2014. (Type: Academic)

WE are a consortium office and we have 9 member libraries. One of the libraries is on III's Sierra. We have a committee to investigate a possible new ILS, but we are not yet ready to made a decision yet. (Type: Consortium)

I have only been here since July 1st so some of the questions I was not sure about. (Type: Academic)

With the vendor's adoption of cloud based products e.g., Alma, Intota and Worldshare - and we can only speak to Exlibris here - it feels like most of the vendors resources as well as their most experienced service reps are being moved to support both Alma and Primo. This has resulted in a substantial decrease in both product and institutional knowledge on the Voyager side. (Type: Academic)

We're not in the market for a new ILS at the moment, and Ex Libris Voyager more or less serves our needs. We do belong to [...] , who have been working on a statewide open source/discovery solution for our libraries. We are committed beta testers, but so far nothing has been done yet. (Type: Academic)

[..] is part of the [...] consortium. My decision for any new product would based on what the group has agreed to. (Type: Academic)

We migrated to a Linux RedHat server this summer and it took about 3 months for a services down problem to be identified (fault of university backup system on the virtual server to which we migrated) and resolved (university moved some processes off the server on which the library virtual server was being hosted and this seems to have resolved the services down problem) (Type: Academic)

Cloud based solutions seem to come with giving up local control, e.g. Ex Libris' Alma and OCLC's WorldShare. Seems like putting all the eggs in one basket, when the library systems seem far behind non-library information management. We'd like to see truly innovative solutions, but they don't seem to be coming from library automation companies. (Type: Medical)

Our official position on changing ILS is "we are surveying the field of web-based library management solutions as the products develop in order to anticipate what actions may be prudent in the next 3-4 years". (Type: Academic)

Tender in 2014 with be for a Wales-wide system for Welsh HE. (Type: Academic)

We know we will have to implement a Discovery layer but not sure how to pay for it. (Type: Academic)

We are part of the [...] (Type: Academic)

We have had Voyager by Exlibris for close to 15 years. The system has gradually evolved a level of functionality that was desired at the beginning. At this point, it serves our needs as we deliberate whether to move to a new commerical ils, or to an open-source system. (Type: Medical)

We are likely to migrate to a Koha based system in 2014. (Type: Theology)

We have just purchased Primo and SFX, but have still to implement. Feeling generally is that with Ex Libris having such a massive market share, to pick anything else would be a brave choice. In the recent procurement process for our new RDS, most competing vendors did not present their products and services in a particularly good light. Questions about support and implementation were poorly answered, not giving the impression that we would be in safe hands. Summon would have been a good choice, but didn't have all of the features that we required. Ex Libris are proving themselves invincible in the market place, their products are far more fully developed, and their customer interaction is slick and professional. Competition between universities in the UK makes it difficult to make interesting choices in systems when your competitors are opting for the market leaders. Our dissatisfaction with our Voyager support stems from paying high annual maintenance costs, and receiving what feels like second class support from a vendor that is only interested in developing the latest system. Also practically, Voyager support is only provided by Chicago/Boston rather than from the other support centres around the globe. However, all too often we have had to ask our account manager to chase up cases for us. We are interested in seeing if our Primo Support fares any better. (Type: Academic)

We still have at least 3 years with Voyager, so it's just the early stages of looking for a new system. (Type: )

Cost is always a factor when we consider ILS's and why we might have to migrate in the future. (Type: )

Overall very satisfied with ILS but Voyager is now an old system and we require new features for our digital content. (Type: State)

As a group of arts colleges we find use of the OPAC huge. Focus is on printed material. The e-resources are not used all that much. Summon has been unpopular. Voyager considred old and tired. Are testing a new generation federated search product Explorit by Deep Web Technologies. (Type: Academic)

The Library will go into a Request for Tender process with the [...] in early 2014. At that point, the combined requirements will be available, and vendors who meet those requirements will have their products considered for adoption. (Type: Academic)

Responses are for the University Library, plus departmental, and, in effect college libraries. [...] has a very complicated system of libraries. (Type: Academic)

- (Type: )

We direct most support issues/questions to the Voyager user listserv. (Type: Theology)

We are not currently pursuing an RFP for a new ILS or discovery system. However, we are keeping apprised of trends with the intention of moving to a new ILS or LMS within the next few years. This may affect our discovery tool. (Type: Academic)

Open source ILS is desired, but nothing is stable enough to manage the size/complexity of our collections. (Type: Academic)

collection total includes e-books and e-journal titles that we get via database subscription (Type: Academic)

The approximate number of items includes the electronic books and electronic journals in addition to our physical collection. (Type: Academic)

ILS

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