Library Technology Guides

Documents, Databases, News, and Commentary

Select another Product Report:

Statistical Report for ALEPH 500


2017 Survey Results
Product: ALEPH 500 Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction76 2 3 2 1 4 13 16 24 10 1 75.846
ILS Functionality76 2 2 2 4 14 13 11 16 8 4 75.496
Print Functionality75 1 1 1 4 3 8 21 25 11 87.077
Electronic Functionality74 8 6 17 9 4 15 6 7 2 23.503
Company Satisfaction75 3 2 1 1 3 9 11 25 15 5 76.277
Support Satisfaction73 2 1 4 3 6 10 7 22 12 6 76.007
Support Improvement73 3 2 3 2 12 30 9 7 3 2 54.895
Company Loyalty74 4 3 2 2 1 11 6 16 11 18 96.357
Open Source Interest74 24 11 4 6 8 5 6 4 3 3 02.822

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS76 4964.47%
Considering new Interface76 1114.47%
System Installed on time?76 5977.63%

Average Collection size: 1450175

TypeCount
Public3
Academic54
School0
Consortium2
Special2

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,0002
[2] 10,001-100,00015
[3] 100,001-250,00011
[4] 250,001-1,000,00022
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,00019
[6] over 10,000,0012



2016 Survey Results
Product: ALEPH 500 Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction129 1 1 5 10 8 15 35 31 15 8 65.956
ILS Functionality129 1 8 12 13 11 27 32 16 9 75.856
Print Functionality128 2 4 4 5 6 17 27 39 24 86.967
Electronic Functionality126 10 15 21 16 12 21 15 9 6 1 23.714
Company Satisfaction128 1 7 6 9 15 19 37 24 10 76.247
Support Satisfaction127 2 3 4 3 10 16 22 32 23 12 76.207
Support Improvement127 1 3 4 21 51 17 7 16 7 55.505
Company Loyalty127 4 4 3 5 10 14 15 16 23 33 96.447
Open Source Interest128 40 12 18 13 15 7 8 2 5 8 02.782

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS130 8565.38%
Considering new Interface130 1511.54%
System Installed on time?130 11084.62%

Average Collection size: 1481089

TypeCount
Public9
Academic95
School1
Consortium3
Special5

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,0004
[2] 10,001-100,00029
[3] 100,001-250,00013
[4] 250,001-1,000,00041
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,00032
[6] over 10,000,0014


Statistics according to type and size categories

The following table presents the 2015 results according to the type and size of the library.

ALEPH 500allAcademicPublicSchoolConsortium
smallmediumlargesmallmediumlarge
navgnavgnavgnavgnavgnavgnavgnavgnavg
SatisfactionLevelILS1105.86 285.71255.08276.5251004
ILSFunctionality1105.80 286.07255.40275.6351004
PrintFunctionality1106.86 286.64256.48277.4451004
ElectronicFunctionality1073.81 284.00252.76264.0851004
SatisfactionCustomerSupport1096.08 285.82254.92276.5950004
CompanyLoyalty1066.29 275.89255.64267.0850004



2015 Survey Results
Product: ALEPH 500 Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction110 1 3 5 4 11 14 23 26 21 2 75.866
ILS Functionality110 4 7 3 6 17 30 25 15 3 65.806
Print Functionality110 1 1 2 5 1 11 14 22 39 14 86.867
Electronic Functionality107 12 12 11 12 17 15 10 10 7 1 43.814
Company Satisfaction108 2 4 7 7 12 19 30 21 6 76.167
Support Satisfaction109 1 2 5 6 7 14 20 24 23 7 76.086
Support Improvement105 2 4 4 15 35 16 12 11 6 55.515
Company Loyalty106 4 5 4 8 15 11 20 19 20 76.297
Open Source Interest109 29 17 14 6 11 13 7 5 4 3 02.832

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS114 6355.26%
Considering new Interface114 1311.40%
System Installed on time?114 9785.09%

Average Collection size: 2504333

TypeCount
Public7
Academic85
School0
Consortium5
Special4

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,0003
[2] 10,001-100,00021
[3] 100,001-250,00022
[4] 250,001-1,000,00026
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,00030
[6] over 10,000,0015



2014 Survey Results
Product: ALEPH 500 Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction139 8 6 9 11 22 50 21 12 76.357
ILS Functionality139 8 5 9 9 30 37 25 16 76.447
Print Functionality137 7 3 12 38 52 25 87.468
Electronic Functionality137 6 5 10 11 19 32 24 16 7 7 54.885
Company Satisfaction138 3 8 5 6 17 20 32 31 16 76.377
Support Satisfaction138 2 4 6 3 11 14 15 38 27 18 76.337
Support Improvement135 2 2 1 4 21 48 16 14 9 18 55.695
Company Loyalty138 6 4 4 6 10 9 17 32 19 31 76.327
Open Source Interest136 33 25 20 4 11 16 9 14 2 2 02.852

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS140 6445.71%
Considering new Interface140 1812.86%
System Installed on time?140 11783.57%

Average Collection size: 1305573

TypeCount
Public15
Academic103
School0
Consortium2
Special5

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,0006
[2] 10,001-100,00021
[3] 100,001-250,00028
[4] 250,001-1,000,00039
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,00034
[6] over 10,000,0013



2013 Survey Results
Product: ALEPH 500 Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction96 1 3 2 5 5 10 12 36 16 6 76.237
ILS Functionality96 3 4 1 5 11 12 31 24 5 76.417
Print Functionality96 2 1 2 1 5 6 24 44 11 87.238
Electronic Functionality96 4 11 9 8 14 15 14 16 4 1 74.395
Company Satisfaction96 1 3 6 3 6 7 17 24 24 5 76.157
Support Satisfaction96 1 4 3 3 10 9 15 19 24 8 86.167
Support Improvement94 1 3 4 6 7 39 10 10 8 6 55.325
Company Loyalty96 7 2 5 1 8 6 10 21 16 20 76.177
Open Source Interest94 22 12 15 9 6 11 4 7 4 4 03.072

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS99 4040.40%
Considering new Interface99 2121.21%
System Installed on time?99 8484.85%

Average Collection size: 1419886

TypeCount
Public2
Academic68
School0
Consortium3
Special5

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,0005
[2] 10,001-100,00015
[3] 100,001-250,00013
[4] 250,001-1,000,00033
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,00018
[6] over 10,000,0013



2012 Survey Results
Product: ALEPH 500 Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction130 1 3 6 7 12 25 48 23 5 76.367
ILS Functionality130 1 5 2 8 12 24 42 30 6 76.467
Print Functionality0 00.00
Electronic Functionality0 00.00
Company Satisfaction130 1 1 4 8 11 15 22 37 26 5 76.127
Support Satisfaction129 1 2 7 13 7 14 23 33 23 6 75.896
Support Improvement126 2 2 4 5 17 40 17 16 18 5 55.525
Company Loyalty129 7 5 3 3 5 18 16 26 28 18 86.167
Open Source Interest128 34 16 13 12 6 15 13 10 7 2 03.123

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS133 4634.59%
Considering new Interface133 3627.07%
System Installed on time?133 10679.70%

Average Collection size: 10677748

TypeCount
Public5
Academic92
School1
Consortium7
Special7

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,0008
[2] 10,001-100,00012
[3] 100,001-250,00019
[4] 250,001-1,000,00033
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,00036
[6] over 10,000,0013



2011 Survey Results
Product: ALEPH 500 Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction139 1 2 3 7 12 11 22 47 27 7 76.277
ILS Functionality135 3 8 9 10 9 15 41 31 9 76.207
Print Functionality0 00.00
Electronic Functionality0 00.00
Company Satisfaction139 2 2 7 8 12 12 24 38 21 13 76.067
Support Satisfaction138 3 1 7 7 10 16 20 40 22 12 76.097
Support Improvement139 2 2 4 7 16 51 14 13 15 15 55.615
Company Loyalty137 9 10 3 5 6 24 10 21 30 19 85.797
Open Source Interest139 32 14 20 7 13 20 16 6 3 8 03.323

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS140 3625.71%
Considering new Interface140 4532.14%
System Installed on time?140 10877.14%

Average Collection size: 1515109

TypeCount
Public8
Academic102
School1
Consortium5
Special6

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,0006
[2] 10,001-100,00023
[3] 100,001-250,00019
[4] 250,001-1,000,00034
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,00034
[6] over 10,000,0014



2010 Survey Results
Product: ALEPH 500 Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction105 1 1 7 3 12 18 39 20 4 76.417
ILS Functionality0 00.00
Print Functionality0 00.00
Electronic Functionality0 00.00
Company Satisfaction104 1 4 6 10 18 14 31 16 4 75.976
Support Satisfaction104 2 7 5 7 14 21 20 25 3 85.966
Support Improvement103 6 1 3 14 43 12 6 9 9 55.335
Company Loyalty103 6 4 5 6 17 9 22 15 19 75.987
Open Source Interest103 16 18 10 10 10 17 8 6 5 3 13.403

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS106 2018.87%
Considering new Interface106 6359.43%
System Installed on time?106 8983.96%

Average Collection size: 1854711

TypeCount
Public4
Academic76
School0
Consortium4
Special3

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,0001
[2] 10,001-100,00016
[3] 100,001-250,00013
[4] 250,001-1,000,00025
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,00029
[6] over 10,000,0012



2009 Survey Results
Product: ALEPH 500 Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction133 2 2 1 7 7 16 26 37 31 4 76.267
ILS Functionality0 00.00
Print Functionality0 00.00
Electronic Functionality0 00.00
Company Satisfaction131 4 1 5 4 11 20 20 35 25 6 76.007
Support Satisfaction132 4 2 5 4 12 24 27 23 20 11 65.866
Support Improvement123 3 1 2 3 14 43 19 16 11 11 55.675
Company Loyalty132 11 5 5 6 7 11 13 26 31 17 85.897
Open Source Interest131 30 10 11 12 12 15 16 15 3 7 03.664

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS135 1611.85%
Considering new Interface135 6145.19%
System Installed on time?135 10577.78%





2008 Survey Results
Product: ALEPH 500 Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction66 2 1 1 6 5 8 12 20 9 2 75.806
ILS Functionality0 00.00
Print Functionality0 00.00
Electronic Functionality0 00.00
Company Satisfaction66 2 2 7 5 7 7 16 10 7 3 65.206
Support Satisfaction66 2 1 6 11 4 13 8 13 5 3 55.055
Support Improvement0 not applicable
Company Loyalty66 6 3 3 7 7 9 8 8 8 7 55.065
Open Source Interest66 9 6 8 3 6 14 5 9 1 5 54.115

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS66 812.12%
Considering new Interface66 3756.06%
System Installed on time?66 5278.79%





2007 Survey Results
Product: ALEPH 500 Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction78 4 2 4 2 4 9 15 28 9 1 75.696
ILS Functionality0 00.00
Print Functionality0 00.00
Electronic Functionality0 00.00
Company Satisfaction87 5 2 7 5 10 14 12 22 8 2 75.166
Support Satisfaction86 5 4 8 4 16 10 13 16 6 4 44.885
Support Improvement0 not applicable
Company Loyalty85 11 6 3 6 8 20 6 11 6 8 54.655
Open Source Interest87 17 8 11 4 13 13 4 9 3 5 03.624

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS88 89.09%
Considering new Interface88 3438.64%
System Installed on time?88 11.14%




2017 : gen: 5.84 company 6.27 loyalty 6.35 support 6.00

2016 : gen: 5.95 company 6.24 loyalty 6.44 support 6.20

2015 : gen: 5.86 company 6.16 loyalty 6.29 support 6.08

2014 : gen: 6.35 company 6.37 loyalty 6.32 support 6.33

2013 : gen: 6.23 company 6.15 loyalty 6.17 support 6.16

2012 : gen: 6.36 company 6.12 loyalty 6.16 support 5.89

2011 : gen: 6.27 company 6.06 loyalty 5.79 support 6.09

2010 : gen: 6.41 company 5.97 loyalty 5.98 support 5.96

2009 : gen: 6.26 company 6.00 loyalty 5.89 support 5.86

2008 : gen: 5.80 company 5.20 loyalty 5.06 support 5.05

2007 : gen: 5.69 company 5.16 loyalty 4.65 support 4.88

Comments

The transfer of our servers to vendor's cloud, caused a lot of problems lately (connectivity and performance), but hopefully it will be solved soon. (Type: Academic)

We are part of the [...] system, and therefore, ILS selection, implementation and maintenance was/is managed by [...] . Because we did not have a systems librarian on staff when [...] selected Aleph as its ILS back in the early 2000s, we signed on as a managed service. [...] setup and managed our tables and we had very little control over customizing Aleph. I joined the staff in 2010 and requested many changes to Aleph's original setups for the library, which for the most part have been done, but I only have access to four tables - I can edit due dates, fines & limits; library open/closed hours; patron registration & renewal dates; and patron statuses. All other changes to the tables must be completed by [...] staff via a Footprints service request system. For the most part it has worked well, but I don't have the ability to investigate or implement new functionality without permission from [...] . Most of our use of the ILS is "plain vanilla" - as it was out of the box. I'm hoping our next system will be more user friendly so a staff member can have more privileges and access to customing the system to meet our needs. We don't use Aleph for any e-resource management. Currently I use ERMes for this. It would be nice to have it all in one place. (Type: Academic)

[...] is going to take the option to extend our contract with Ex libres until 2020. We have just started the process of planning the migration. No one is thrilled with Ex Libres, but being a very large consortium, our choices are limited. (Type: Academic)

We are implementing Alma/Primo in January 2016 (Type: Academic)

We are on the lookout for a "next-gen" system that would be able to meet the needs of public libraries as well as university and a national library within a consortium. Ranging from the smallest to the largest libraries within the country. (Type: Consortium)

We will stay with Aleph as long as it is supported and few years after that and after that we will probably by forced to migrate to something else. Rather than getting another commercial system we will then probably migrate to some open source system. Not very likely to migrate to Alma - we do not trust the vendor to not change the system and licensing rules as they see fit (as happened already with Alma API). (Type: Independent Research)

We are not satisfied with the discovery layer of this system. As currently configured, the results lists contain too many false hits, and are not sorted well (relevance ranking remains very difficult to do well. ) (Type: Academic)

While the consortium to which our library belongs is investigating Kuale Ole, our individual library has no interest in an open source product. We do not have the staff required to implement, manage, and maintain an open source solution. (Type: Academic)

We are not excited about the VUFind interface to Summon, but we lacked the institutional effort to investigate and find a better, more affordable alternative. (Type: Academic)

The number of items does not include our e-resource collection. My main concern is that it is difficult in our library environment (+300 Icelandic libraries are using the same ILS vendor) is to get attention and efforts to meet university library needs as the univ. libraries are only seven. The main concern of the ILS vendor are the public and school libraries. There has not been a discussion among the university libraries directors to use other discovery tools or options. Should they decide on any other solutions, it would probably be done in unison and not on an individual library bases. (Type: Academic)

We are currently running Aleph but we have signed a contract to move to Alma with a go-live of July 2016. (Type: Academic)

We are part of [...] so any decision to migrate to a new ILS will depend on what [...] as a whole decides. (Type: Academic)

The missing functionality in the ILS to manage e-resources properly with the current separate handling of cataloging, discovery and access to e-resources in a consortial environment becomes more and more an urgent issue. Since we have to provide consortial functionalities to our libraries we see that such features are not really supported to the required Needs by the various vendors. Current open source products are not catering to such needs neither. (Type: Consortium)

We're in our final Aleph service contract period and are seeing the limitations of a 15+ year old system. [...] is currently working towards identifying what we need out of a new management system, and we're working towards an eventual RFP. We hope to have the RFP out this coming summer. (Type: Academic)

RFI responses for new ILS received. Review in process. Decision in spring; will know more in 2016 about direction this 6-library group will take. (Type: Academic)

We are still running a legacy system with which we have done a lot of customization. We would consider moving to their new cloud based system but are wary of the loss of access to database and configuration tables that we currently have. We are also very concerned about the loss of functionality moving to a new system. We've noticed a decrease in the number of releases for the legacy product which is a concern as well as a decrease in the legacy system sessions in the user group conference. In spite of this, we are not convinced there is anything out there that is any better. Could be a case of better the devil you know... (Type: Church)

Shrinking market as a result of mergers and acquisitions will result in less choice and less competition. Such a monopolistic ILS market will have a detrimental impact potentially on library operations. (Type: Academic)

We are an Art and Design Library, therefore we still rely on print material, it constitutes approx. 75% of our collection and seems to still be in demand from a large portion of our students and patrons. Most current ILS concentrate on electric resources, so we are not sure if it would matter what ILS we used. (Type: Special)

Product is not user friendly--it takes a considerable amount of time for a new staff member to learn to use this system effectively. (Type: Academic)

We are quite a small library and rely on the [...] office for assistance. I could not implement open source on my own. (Type: Academic)

Have had current system - Aleph since 2008 and it is starting to show its age. Hoping to tender for next generation system within next 2 years and work involved and value of tender will mean that we will approach all LMS vendors rather than automatically upgrade to Alma. (Type: Academic)

We have not started "real" consideration of new LMS yet, just keeping an eye on the market (Type: Medical)

Also, actively planning to upgrade current version of Aleph to improve services while investigating the next generation ILS. (Type: Academic)

We are part of a consortia. The consortia would not consider open source but we would. Most answers are for our preference and not for the consortia. (Type: Academic)

The maintenance fee from vendor is too high. (Type: Academic)

Our setup is not reflected in a good way in the above answers. WE only use Aleph as our vehicle for printed books. Electronic resources and journals in print are handled by other systems, mainly DTU Findit. We are using, and are extremely happy with SFX from Ex Libris as our link resolver. (Type: Academic)

ILS