Library Technology Guides

---

Statistical Report for Millennium

5 Responses for Millennium in 2022

2021 : gen: 4.33 company 4.89 loyalty 2.67 support 5.22

2020 : gen: 4.69 company 4.88 loyalty 3.57 support 5.44

2019 : gen: 5.32 company 4.58 loyalty 4.21 support 4.59

2018 : gen: 5.23 company 4.63 loyalty 4.49 support 4.45

2017 : gen: 5.47 company 5.23 loyalty 4.85 support 4.93

2016 : gen: 5.14 company 4.66 loyalty 4.66 support 4.59

2015 : gen: 5.76 company 5.13 loyalty 5.24 support 5.20

2014 : gen: 6.12 company 5.61 loyalty 5.68 support 5.60

2013 : gen: 6.44 company 6.09 loyalty 6.04 support 5.91

2012 : gen: 6.68 company 6.44 loyalty 6.49 support 6.39

2011 : gen: 6.88 company 6.50 loyalty 6.55 support 6.55

2010 : gen: 7.11 company 6.66 loyalty 6.40 support 6.67

2009 : gen: 7.13 company 6.58 loyalty 6.33 support 6.53

2008 : gen: 7.08 company 6.43 loyalty 6.53 support 6.44

2007 : gen: 7.16 company 6.45 loyalty 6.24 support 6.20

Comments

the number above is physical items; add 170405 ebooks to above if you wanted that (Type: Academic)

Innovative Interfaces priced us out of their market....too costly to update to continue with their products (Type: Academic)

Since we access millenium through our consortium, I really can't comment on the customer service provided by innovative interfaces. I hope that the upgrade to Sierra will obviate the need for much of the support from the cooperative library system. There is a lousy discovery product inplace but I believe most of the directors in the consortium want to wait until the new ILS has been up and running for a while before they consider another major change. (Type: Public)

We have undergone a dramatic reduction in space and lost the ability to manage and house a print collection save a few titles in a Ready Reference Collection. While we had a separate library system and are an independent library, the print materials and management of these items went to the main library. We are left to wonder what we are doing moving forward. Having a full ILS for an electronic only collection is nuts. This is what is driving us to a new option. It is not dissatisfaction with III. Interesting times indeed - but I suspect others will be here also. (Type: Business)

We've had some ups and downs with our ILS vendor this year. Sometimes service has been great - fast response and very helpful. Other times, open calls sit and sit ... and then we have to escalate them. We're just finding that it used to be consistently pretty good - now it's a crap shoot. (Type: Public)

While we are impressed with the functionality of III's Sierra, we are unlikely to upgrade to it. We want to put more of our resources into customer services and resources that most directly benefit the user and our current thinking is that both they and we could make do with a less robustly functional ILS system if we can get substantial savings AND a less functional but just as reliable system. Open Source or the OCLC product are both options we are considering; neither seem to have passed the reliability/stability test yet, but we think they will. (Type: Academic)

We are the lead library in a public library consortium. Some of the directors are unhappy with III's price structure and cost. (Type: Public)

I was not here when our ILS system was purchased and installed. Since I have been here we have had good service, upgrades have been performed according to schedule. (Type: Public)

VuFind-Plus is a great fit for [...]! (Type: Public)

Approximate # of items is physical items; that number does not include electronic resources. (Type: Academic)

Consortium RFP in process. (Type: Academic)

We consider that Sierra is not a new ILS but it is a new version of Millennium. (Type: Academic)

"Number of items in collection" reflects number of item RECORDS in our OPAC (Type: Academic)

It's not that Millennium is bad, it's more that times have changed. We are a medical library and almost all of our resources are either electronic (or will soon be). We have very little print and even less circulation. (Type: Medical)

Generally, we are pretty satisfied with the quality of the product, the support and innovative services our vendor offers. We are interested in seeing how newer platforms can better accommodate e-resources. We are, however, concerned about the rising costs, as our budget remains static. As a stand alone library, we worry about being priced out of our current system and having to switch to a product of lesser quality. We don't want to have to choose between the services we offer our patrons and the system we use to support library services. (Type: Academic)

Currently investigating, but no purchase decision made yet, to use EBSCO's Discovery Service. We remain concerned about the level of customer service delivered by III since it's new ownership. (Type: Public)

I think the restructuring of III has made them not as efficient as they had been. I'm hopeful this will eventually work itself out. Re: Discovery layer. We have OCLC and HATE it. When we upgrade we will be getting the discovery layer of whatever system we go with. (Type: Law)

It seems that since the sale of Innovative Interfaces from the original owner that service has been lacking and there was no courtship when we indicated we were shopping for a new ILS. III did nothing to keep us (and we've been with the company for 20+ years). It was time for a change and time to go with a company thinking about 21st century libraries. (Type: Academic)

Innovative is trying to become more open and community centered, but these efforts haven't gotten very far. (Type: Academic)

I dramatically increased the approximate number of items because this year I included everything we have in the ILS catalog (print, ebook, and streaming media). (Type: Academic)

Innovative has the best serials and acquisitions modules, which is why we are sticking with them for now. We are currently on Millennium and are not eager to switch to Sierra, which we've been told by other users is basically the same product for much more money (a considerable one time fee). III told us that if we want to stick with Millennium instead of Sierra, they're going to start increasing our costs by 10% a year, which will pretty much ensure that we're going to start shopping around. If some of these other products (Intota/Koha/Kuali) can develop further and become viable alternative, we'll definitely be looking to switch rather than pay III's exorbitant increased costs. (Type: Academic)

In general, [...] is satisfied with Serials Solutions (ProQuest) as a vendor. We have 360 Core, 360 Counter, 360 Resource Manager, Intota Assessment, 360 Link, 360 MARC Updates. We have had Summon for 4 years now and like it. Our migration toward SerSol/Proquest has been ongoing for at least 6 years. Our very positive experience with all the Serials Solutions products and services, as well as the vendor relations make us want to wait as long as we can to actually see and evaluate full Intota as an "ILS". We don't want to be impatient and jump into many more years of iii, or some other vendor's ILS and then be unhappy if Intota turns out to be something great. (Type: Academic)

Our library's biggest concern with Innovative is the Millennium pricing model. We frequently learn that problems we have reported to the helpdesk, or new workflows we would like to implement, will require adding a new module to the system. New modules typically cost between $1000 and $4000 upfront and several hundred dollars annually (through maintenance fee increases). We have seen no indication that Innovative will change this model with Sierra. Given our staff reluctance to change workflows, it seems likely we will not migrate to a new ILS until compelled by our systems vendor, and at that time, Sierra will be an attractive option. Our library is doing its best to manage e-resources with homegrown systems. I don't see sufficient staff time savings to justify paying to add ERM functionality to our link resolver/knowledge base product. Next generation ILS products offer potential to manage e-resource workflows in new ways, but I'm not convinced the systems are ready yet. (Type: Academic)

We are moving to Sierra. Should have gone live the 15th September but there are issues with Sierra that are delaying the process. (Type: Consortium)

We have been maintaining a "watching brief" on the ILS market for the past two years. Our current vendor has introduced their next generation platform, but we're not sufficiently convinced we should just upgrade to it. We're interested in emerging cloud-based services like OCLC's Worldshare, but not convinced they're ready for prime time yet. We are already making extensive use of open source solutions for other major library services, e.g. ERM, and are considering if it is also time to go in that direction for the ILS. (Type: Academic)

The timetable for the ‘future’ of Innovative Interface's Millennium needs to be made clearer. It seems that Innovative Interfaces Inc., as hard as they are working to migrate libraries currently on Millennium to Sierra, still needs a strategy for keeping up with emerging services for libraries on Millennium such as eBooks. It would be better if Innovative staff could be more engaged with customers and help us provide emerging services using existing Millennium products. (Type: Public)

We use Summon for Discovery, but our library frontpage, [...] directs people to QuickSearch our BentoBox Style Search Interface (Type: Academic)

We are currently investigating migrating to Sierra or WorldShare. Millennium will not be supported in the near future. (Type: Academic)

Each relationship between Costumer and ILS vendor comes down year per year. (Type: Academic)

ILS Vendors have to realize that library budgets are shrinking dramatically. They increase their maintenance fees 3 - 5% / year, while our budgets are decreasing by the same amount. It's simply not sustainable in the long run. Our primary reasons for not remaining with III are: Cost of maintenance Lack of support (Type: Special)

We are in migration now, but not live from III to OCLC> (Type: Academic)

Currently both Proquest and III are promoting their services (Type: Academic)

Not sustainable, average functionality, near non-existent support and too expensive. It is too costly in staff time and money to gain any kind of level of functionality that we require out of Millennium. We are a public library that doesn't have staff resources or a magic money tree to support this system. New features and products are typically a nightmare for staff to implement and fall below expectations. Costly add-on APIs and SIP2 licences only add to annual bills we struggle to afford. Millennium or Sierra isn't a system I'd recommend for any forward thinking library service that aims to be sustainable. (Type: Public)

What continues to be a point of concern for our library is the cost of operating our ILS. It is very expensive, and the annual expenses consume much of our precious few budget resources. (Type: Academic)

Response time for support services for Millennium has declined in recent years, but especially so in the past year. (Type: Consortium)

Our library's collection represents about 3% of the consortium. (Type: Public)

Summon is not as good as it was 12 months ago. It performs slowly and doesn't return all items in search results, that we know are there. (Type: Academic)

We will be upgrading to SIERRA in June 2015. (Type: Academic)

A second year into using Millennium and we have uncovered a few more idiosyncracies with the system. Even so, we are still happy with the choice of the ILS and don't believe there are alternative systems that are significantly better. Support continues to be the main complaint, despite Innovative's stated efforts to improve in this area. As an example, our system is hosted by Innovative and we have been waiting over three months for an upgrade to the server resources so that we can migrate to Sierra from Millennium. And we have no clear explanation of why it is taking so long or when it will happen. In short, we are satisfied with the product but not so much with the company . (Type: Public)

We considered migration to a new ILS, but have decided to defer until Millennium is closer to end of life. (Type: Academic)

La biblioteca de la [...] va a realizar su migracion al SGB Koha durante el año 2015. (Type: Academic)

On the whole, we've found the support service from Innovative to be good. However, we've been very disappointed with the performance of their library relations managers initiative. We expected this would bring III closer and more responsive to our other needs outside operational support but this hasn't happened. (Type: Academic)

Sierra is being implemented i december (Type: Academic)

The user interface for library workers of this program is now outdated and unresponsive, our library consortium ([...]) should think about upgrading to a current one (Type: Public)

I think the number of items in our collection is drastically low. However, no one is here to give me an accurate answer and the number above autopopulated. (Type: Public)

Our current vendor scores very high on their customer service. Our current ILS is very stable. However, our vendor's next gen ILS offering is not particularly appealing. (Type: Academic)

Since Innovative has switched ownership, there have been some issues with support and getting information. The other on-going issue, which was also an issue with the former owners, is that the prices charged for additional products and services is excessive. (Type: Public)

For the past five years Innovative has been deaf to our concerns about their mandating RedHat 5 and the many related security vulnerabilities inherent in their required configuration. In 2011 their VP of Technology answered my security related questions with smoke and mirrors BS, and then promised they would support for RedHat 6 by 2012. It still hasn't happened and were nearly in 2015. The recent hacks into their systems (including ours) is the final straw for us, and we are migrating off III as expeditiously as possible. (Type: Academic)

Having dealt with Millennium for over six years, I think it is one of the most poorly implemented, labyrinthine systems I've ever had to work with. Its documentation is difficult to decipher (at best), and its multi-faceted layers of permissions and options are some of the best examples of software cruft and poor UX in the modern age. I'm not certain anyone else's business models are much better, but I find the whole idea of having to contact Innovative for simple things (like adjusting certain reports) patronizing, and paying for cable company-like bundling repugnant. (Type: Academic)

Lack of training (including adequate documentation)continues to be a major problem. We are moving away from the Innovative link resolver due to performance issues. (Type: Academic)

number of items is physical items not e volumes. (Type: Medical)

III would have been a good product IF our library had the budget to pay for all of the modules. As it is, we have a Cadillac system, but with only the steering wheel, engine and axles. It was a poor choice on the part of the previous library director to purchase this system. That said, III's customer service has always been excellent and the system we do have works well. In the past couple of years, however, it is less likely that I will be able to talk with someone in person at III, and more likely that I'll get put into a queue for someone to get back to me later. This always happens in a timely fashion, however. As for Ex Libris, we purchased this system because the other community college libraries in Washington state are planning to get this vendor. We attended a meeting where librarians from Orbis-Cascade Alliance talked about why they chose Ex Libris instead of continuing with III, and much of what they said made sense. Also, for the same price as we pay for the basic circulation, cataloging, system admin, reports modules in III, we can get something with an acquisitions module, periodicals module, extensive analytics and that will also help us manage our electronic subscriptions. The downside of Ex Libris appears to be their customer support. All support cases must be logged in online - I rarely, if ever, communicate one-to-one with a support technician. I NEVER have spoken to one on the phone, like I commonly do with the technicians at III. Our implementation of Primo was rocky, at best, because they rushed the libraries through the implementation and we never clearly understood the implications of the choices we were being asked to make in the implementation "workbooks." They also switched staff in the middle of the implementation. We have been promised a better experience with the implementation of Alma. We hope this is true. (Type: Academic)

We are part of a consortium of [...] that share a Millennium system. This is a system hosted by III, and our contract expires in April 2015. (Type: Academic)

[...] has already signed a contract with SirsiDynix to replace Millennium, but have not yet implemented the system. (Type: Public)

The collection size for ALL material types, both hard copy and electronic is 568,181. At present there is heavy weeding of collection that is taking place for the plans to merge the two libraries next Spring. (Type: Academic)

We are very happy to be leaving III's Millennium for Symphony, for ebook integration in OPAC, & many other reasons. (Type: Public)

We are a large Special library currently linked as a branch library to an academic institution. In theory this should have worked very well but in practice we find that we still need to have dependable ICT competency when using a large system such as Innopac. We therefore need to find an alternative and a Cloud service appears very appealing. It is terrifying though to move into this relatively unknown territory. (Type: Special)

It is critical to have a system that will cater for all informational and research needs (Type: Public)

Awaiting approval to purchase Sierra. Switched from Summon to EDS mainly because price was better. (Type: Academic)

We are part of a 17-library consortium and we are looking to migrate to a common system in the next year or so. (Type: Academic)

We have just begun the process of migrating from Millennium to Sierra. (Type: Public)

Customer service has definitely deteriorated over the past year. III has implemented a new customer support process which does not work as smoothly as in the past. Also III is intent on acquiring other companies and perhaps that drive to acquire has taken priority over the desire to support customers. We are still on Millennium and have not yet migrated to Sierra--perhaps that is the problem. Just my opinion based on my experience. (Type: Public)

We are very concerned about the lack ILS vendors pursuing FedRAMP approval. We may be forced to disregard all ILS features, performance and support issues and chose an ILS based only on FedRAMP or other federal or DOD security policy. (Type: Academic)

III clearly feels that they have exhausted (and perhaps lost market share of) sales possibilities to their general Northern American academic library market by aggressively expanding into Northern Ireland, India, and the public library market. This has resulted in slow product development and poor support. Sierra, just like their ERM, is simply not ready to go into production yet they aggressively market and bundle it at discount to get users "hooked" into their next subpar offering. I've been using III products since 1992 and I'd if financially feasible and this library had a big enough tech services staff or monographic collection to warrant it I'd migrate as quickly as possible. (Type: Academic)

There is a government plan to move every public library service in the Republic of Ireland to Innovative's Sierra system next year. We were not consulted on this decision. (Type: Public)

250,000 print items and 200,000 subscription ebooks. We can't afford to upgrade to Sierra, but we like III products and support. We keep reading references to "new workflows", but don't yet know what they are - we have been reluctant to get into EDIFACT processing, as we understand that costs more money frmo the vendor. We are very reluctant to spend money on managing resources - we spend money on the resources themselves. (Type: Theology)

Don't view Sierra as much of a departure from traditional ILS systems. (Type: Academic)

I left the electronic resources question empty because we don't currently use III's product ERM. We use an in-house created spreadsheet. Have Encore Synergy implemented. Attempted and failed to implement Encore Duet. Now shopping again, considering all major products. (Type: Academic)

---

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