Library Technology Guides

Documents, Databases, News, and Commentary

Select another Product Report:

Statistical Report for Carl.X


2017 Survey Results
Product: Carl.X Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction7 2 1 2 2 46.147
ILS Functionality7 1 1 1 2 1 1 76.577
Print Functionality7 2 1 3 1 87.148
Electronic Functionality6 1 1 2 1 1 65.836
Company Satisfaction7 1 1 2 3 86.297
Support Satisfaction7 3 1 2 1 35.296
Support Improvement5 1 1 1 1 1 04.004
Company Loyalty7 2 1 1 2 1 25.717
Open Source Interest7 3 1 1 1 1 02.291

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS7 114.29%
Considering new Interface7 00.00%
System Installed on time?7 457.14%

Average Collection size: 1446049

TypeCount
Public6
Academic0
School0
Consortium1
Special0

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,0000
[2] 10,001-100,0000
[3] 100,001-250,0001
[4] 250,001-1,000,0003
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,0003
[6] over 10,000,0010



2016 Survey Results
Product: Carl.X Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction9 1 5 1 2 77.227
ILS Functionality9 1 3 4 1 76.447
Print Functionality8 2 3 3 76.887
Electronic Functionality8 1 2 1 4 75.887
Company Satisfaction8 1 2 3 2 77.007
Support Satisfaction8 1 1 1 2 2 1 76.757
Support Improvement8 2 1 2 1 2 57.007
Company Loyalty8 1 1 2 4 97.639
Open Source Interest8 6 2 00.250

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS10 110.00%
Considering new Interface10 110.00%
System Installed on time?10 880.00%

Average Collection size: 1102392

TypeCount
Public9
Academic0
School0
Consortium1
Special0

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,0000
[2] 10,001-100,0003
[3] 100,001-250,0000
[4] 250,001-1,000,0002
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,0005
[6] over 10,000,0010


Statistics according to type and size categories

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

Carl.XallAcademicPublicSchoolConsortium
smallmediumlargesmallmediumlarge
navgnavgnavgnavgnavgnavgnavgnavgnavg
SatisfactionLevelILS95.56 10021301
ILSFunctionality95.78 10021301
PrintFunctionality96.33 10021301
ElectronicFunctionality94.78 10021301
SatisfactionCustomerSupport95.78 10021301
CompanyLoyalty94.89 10021301



2015 Survey Results
Product: Carl.X Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction9 1 2 2 1 3 85.565
ILS Functionality9 1 3 1 3 1 55.786
Print Functionality9 1 1 3 1 2 1 66.336
Electronic Functionality9 1 1 3 1 3 44.784
Company Satisfaction9 1 1 1 1 1 4 85.677
Support Satisfaction9 1 1 2 1 4 85.787
Support Improvement9 1 1 2 1 2 2 55.676
Company Loyalty9 2 2 2 1 2 04.895
Open Source Interest9 6 1 2 00.560

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS10 660.00%
Considering new Interface10 330.00%
System Installed on time?10 550.00%

Average Collection size: 1424795

TypeCount
Public6
Academic1
School0
Consortium1
Special0

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,0000
[2] 10,001-100,0002
[3] 100,001-250,0002
[4] 250,001-1,000,0002
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,0004
[6] over 10,000,0010



2014 Survey Results
Product: Carl.X Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction6 1 1 2 2 76.677
ILS Functionality6 2 1 2 1 56.337
Print Functionality6 2 2 1 1 46.507
Electronic Functionality6 1 2 2 1 56.007
Company Satisfaction6 2 2 1 1 56.837
Support Satisfaction5 1 4 87.208
Support Improvement5 2 1 1 1 56.807
Company Loyalty6 1 2 1 2 77.008
Open Source Interest6 3 1 2 03.175

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS6 350.00%
Considering new Interface6 00.00%
System Installed on time?6 583.33%

Average Collection size: 2391334

TypeCount
Public5
Academic0
School0
Consortium1
Special0

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,0000
[2] 10,001-100,0001
[3] 100,001-250,0001
[4] 250,001-1,000,0000
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,0004
[6] over 10,000,0010



2013 Survey Results
Product: Carl.X Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction7 1 1 1 3 1 87.148
ILS Functionality7 1 1 2 2 1 77.147
Print Functionality6 1 4 1 87.678
Electronic Functionality7 2 2 2 1 46.436
Company Satisfaction7 1 1 1 3 1 87.008
Support Satisfaction7 2 1 1 1 2 57.007
Support Improvement7 2 2 1 1 1 45.865
Company Loyalty7 2 3 2 87.438
Open Source Interest7 2 1 3 1 21.712

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS7 228.57%
Considering new Interface7 00.00%
System Installed on time?7 685.71%

Average Collection size: 1775618

TypeCount
Public7
Academic0
School0
Consortium0
Special0

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,0001
[2] 10,001-100,0000
[3] 100,001-250,0002
[4] 250,001-1,000,0000
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,0003
[6] over 10,000,0010



2012 Survey Results
Product: Carl.X Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction8 3 1 2 2 46.007
ILS Functionality8 2 3 2 1 66.256
Print Functionality0 00.00
Electronic Functionality0 00.00
Company Satisfaction8 2 2 2 1 1 46.137
Support Satisfaction8 2 1 1 2 2 46.137
Support Improvement8 4 4 56.007
Company Loyalty8 1 2 1 2 1 1 35.507
Open Source Interest8 2 1 1 2 1 1 03.003

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS8 112.50%
Considering new Interface8 225.00%
System Installed on time?8 787.50%

Average Collection size: 2662290

TypeCount
Public8
Academic0
School0
Consortium0
Special0

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,0001
[2] 10,001-100,0001
[3] 100,001-250,0001
[4] 250,001-1,000,0001
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,0004
[6] over 10,000,0010


5 Responses for Carl.X in 2011

2 Responses for Carl.X in 2010

1 Responses for Carl.X in 2009

3 Responses for Carl.X in 2008

2 Responses for Carl.X in 2007

2017 : gen: 6.14 company 6.29 loyalty 5.71 support 5.29

2016 : gen: 7.22 company 7.00 loyalty 7.63 support 6.75

2015 : gen: 5.56 company 5.67 loyalty 4.89 support 5.78

2014 : gen: 6.67 company 6.83 loyalty 7.00 support 7.20

2013 : gen: 7.14 company 7.00 loyalty 7.43 support 7.00

2012 : gen: 6.00 company 6.13 loyalty 5.50 support 6.13

Comments

We are currently migrating from CARL.X to Polaris. Launch date is March 9. Decision based on their product development, user interface & overall direction of the company. TLC, while developing actively, does not have strong base in the [...], another aspect of our interest in migrating to a new platform. (Type: )

TLC was not responsive in sharing CARL-X full capabilities since 2009 to 2015. It wasn't until our consortium decided to consider another ILS that TLC began promising to do more. Nevertheless,we chose to go with Polaris beginning in June, 2016. (Type: Academic)

We have already selected CARL X by TLC as our next ILS, with the expected go-live date in late [...]. I answered the above questions based on the fact that our current ILS is SIRSI, not CARL X. (Type: )

ILS