Library Technology Guides

Blog content

Blog Posts from Library Technology Guides


Perspective and commentary by Marshall Breeding

subscribe to GuidePosts via RSS

LITA Technology and Industry Interest Group

Library Information and Technology Association

“Bringing service organizations, vendors, IT providers, librarians, and library technologists together to discuss industry and technology trends.”

The newly organized LITA Technology and Industry Interest will meet at the ALA Midwinter Meeting:

Date: Saturday, January 21
Time: 10:30 – 12 noon
Place: Dallas Convention Center A303

Co-Chairs: Marshall Breeding (Vanderbilt University), Matt Goldner (OCLC)

The LITA and Technology Interest Group has been constituted to bring together members from companies and other organizations that produce technology-oriented products and services with members from libraries that depend on them. This IG facilitates the partnerships inherent in the relationship between vendors, including both commercial companies and non-profit organizations and libraries. It spans those involved in proprietary and open source software. These partnerships include involvement in collaborative development of new technology products, beta testing arrangements, involvement with API toolkits or other development platform, and a variety of other activities.

Topics that might be addressed by the Interest Group might include:

  • Strategies for strengthening positive relationships between libraries and their technology partners
  • Working toward more coherent API frameworks across heterogeneous product environments
  • Facilitating library involvement at earlier stages of product development
  • Establishing reasonable expectations regarding vendor support and involvement at library conferences and encouraging libraries to engage with vendors at conferences in ways that increase the value of the investments made in exhibit rental, receptions, and sponsorships.
  • Plan a program for the Annual Conference that highlights these topics and stimulates a dialog between libraries and industry representatives.

IG Web site:

E-Mail List:

Jan 3, 2012 19:27:19
Link to Posting:

Login or register to leave a comment.

Perceptions 2011: An International Survey of Library Automation

I have posted the results the fifth 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 2011: 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

  • Apollo, developed by Biblionix topped the rankings in ILS satisfaction, Company satisfaction, Functionality Completeness, Customer Support, and Customer Loyality. This product scored best last year in product and company satisfaction and topped all of the satisfaction catetories in the 2009 survey. Apollo finds use exclusively in small public libraries, reflected by its leading the competition on ILS satisfaction when considering only libraries with collections under 25,000 items. When lookinig at only public libraries, Apollo receives top ratings in ILS satisfaction. Most libraries adopting Apollo and have migrated from abandoned products such as Winnebago Spectrum and Athena or or are automating for the first time.
  • When considering large libraries with collections larger than one million items, Polaris received highest scores, followed by Millennium.
  • EOS.Web ranked second in the category of ILS support.
  • 566 libraries indicated that they are considering migrating to a new ILS. Innovative Interfaces Sierra was mentioned most frequently as a replacement candidate (88), followed by Evergreen (87).
  • Products that ranked highest in earlier years of the survey, including and Polaris from Polaris Library Systems, Library.Solution from The Library Corporation, AGent VERSO from Auto-Graphics, continue to receive satisfaction scores just as high as before, but fall below the superlative marks given by libraries involved with Apollo, OPALS, or Koha as supported independently or by ByWater Solutions.
  • 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 from Equinox Software, and came out as very strong performers at the top of this middle tier.
  • Except for the libraries already using one, the survey reflected fairly low levels of interest in migrating to an open source ILS, 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 Talis Alto (5), the mode score from libraries using proprietary ILS products was 0. The mode score in this category for all the open source products was 9. Though the open source interest scores were low, a substantial portion of libraries that registered some interest in moving to a new ILS named open source products among the replacement candidates.

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 15 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.

Jan 29, 2012 19:20:13
Link to Posting:

Login or register to leave a comment.


Photo of Marshall Breeding author of

Name: Marshall Breeding

Title: Publisher

Organization: Library Technology Guides


Dec 2019 (1 post)
Feb 2019 (1 post)
Nov 2018 (1 post)
May 2018 (1 post)
Mar 2018 (1 post)
Nov 2017 (2 posts)
May 2017 (1 post)
Jan 2017 (1 post)
Nov 2016 (1 post)
Oct 2016 (1 post)
Jul 2016 (1 post)
Mar 2016 (1 post)
Feb 2016 (1 post)
Nov 2015 (1 post)
May 2015 (3 posts)
Apr 2015 (1 post)
Feb 2015 (2 posts)
Jan 2015 (1 post)
Oct 2014 (2 posts)
Aug 2014 (1 post)
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)