Statistical Report for Apollo
2022 Survey Results |
Product: Apollo |
Response Distribution |
Statistics |
Category | Responses |
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
Mode | Mean | Median |
ILS Satisfaction | 88 |
| | | | | | 2 | 12 | 22 | 52 | 9 | 8.41 | 9 |
ILS Functionality | 89 |
| | | | | 1 | 3 | 12 | 23 | 50 | 9 | 8.33 | 9 |
Print Functionality | 88 |
| | | | | | 4 | 6 | 26 | 52 | 9 | 8.43 | 9 |
Electronic Functionality | 85 |
3 | | | | | 3 | 6 | 14 | 15 | 44 | 9 | 7.82 | 9 |
Company Satisfaction | 89 |
| | | | | 1 | 2 | 10 | 19 | 57 | 9 | 8.45 | 9 |
Support Satisfaction | 86 |
| | 1 | | | 1 | 1 | 7 | 17 | 59 | 9 | 8.48 | 9 |
Support Improvement | 0 |
| | | | | | | | | | 0 | 0.00 | |
Company Loyalty | 89 |
| | | | | 5 | 3 | 9 | 13 | 59 | 9 | 8.33 | 9 |
Open Source Interest | 84 |
34 | 5 | 6 | 4 | 4 | 18 | 2 | 5 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 2.81 | 2 |
Category | Total | Yes | percent |
Considering new ILS | 91 |
2 | 2.20% |
Considering new Interface | 91 |
0 | 0.00% |
System Installed on time? | 91 |
0 | 0.00% |
Average Collection size: |
| 39328 |
Type | Count |
Public | 87 |
Academic | 0 |
School | 0 |
Consortium | 0 |
Special | 1 |
Size Category | Count |
[1] Under 10,000 | 8 |
[2] 10,001-100,000 | 69 |
[3] 100,001-250,000 | 10 |
[4] 250,001-1,000,000 | 0 |
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,000 | 0 |
[6] over 10,000,001 | 0 |
2021 Survey Results |
Product: Apollo |
Response Distribution |
Statistics |
Category | Responses |
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
Mode | Mean | Median |
ILS Satisfaction | 107 |
| | | 1 | | | | 7 | 28 | 71 | 9 | 8.55 | 9 |
ILS Functionality | 107 |
| | | 1 | | | 3 | 5 | 40 | 58 | 9 | 8.39 | 9 |
Print Functionality | 106 |
1 | | 1 | 1 | | 1 | 1 | 7 | 28 | 66 | 9 | 8.33 | 9 |
Electronic Functionality | 103 |
| 2 | 1 | | 1 | 1 | 6 | 14 | 24 | 54 | 9 | 8.01 | 9 |
Company Satisfaction | 105 |
1 | 1 | | | | 1 | 1 | 3 | 24 | 74 | 9 | 8.49 | 9 |
Support Satisfaction | 105 |
| 1 | | | 1 | 1 | 2 | 4 | 28 | 68 | 9 | 8.44 | 9 |
Support Improvement | 0 |
| | | | | | | | | | 0 | 0.00 | |
Company Loyalty | 105 |
| | 1 | | 1 | | | 6 | 22 | 75 | 9 | 8.56 | 9 |
Open Source Interest | 99 |
48 | 8 | 11 | 4 | 3 | 14 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 0 | 2.10 | 1 |
Category | Total | Yes | percent |
Considering new ILS | 110 |
3 | 2.73% |
Considering new Interface | 110 |
0 | 0.00% |
System Installed on time? | 110 |
0 | 0.00% |
Average Collection size: |
| 38192 |
Type | Count |
Public | 103 |
Academic | 0 |
School | 0 |
Consortium | 0 |
Special | 0 |
Size Category | Count |
[1] Under 10,000 | 5 |
[2] 10,001-100,000 | 96 |
[3] 100,001-250,000 | 9 |
[4] 250,001-1,000,000 | 0 |
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,000 | 0 |
[6] over 10,000,001 | 0 |
2020 Survey Results |
Product: Apollo |
Response Distribution |
Statistics |
Category | Responses |
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
Mode | Mean | Median |
ILS Satisfaction | 84 |
| | | | | 2 | | 2 | 22 | 58 | 9 | 8.60 | 9 |
ILS Functionality | 83 |
| | | | | 2 | | 6 | 30 | 45 | 9 | 8.40 | 9 |
Print Functionality | 83 |
| | | | | 3 | | 2 | 28 | 50 | 9 | 8.47 | 9 |
Electronic Functionality | 83 |
| 1 | | | 1 | 5 | 2 | 8 | 23 | 43 | 9 | 8.06 | 9 |
Company Satisfaction | 82 |
| | | | | 1 | | 2 | 17 | 62 | 9 | 8.70 | 9 |
Support Satisfaction | 83 |
| | | | | 4 | | 3 | 15 | 61 | 9 | 8.55 | 9 |
Support Improvement | 0 |
| | | | | | | | | | 0 | 0.00 | |
Company Loyalty | 84 |
2 | | | | | 2 | 1 | 4 | 16 | 59 | 9 | 8.37 | 9 |
Open Source Interest | 74 |
37 | 5 | 7 | 6 | 8 | 8 | 1 | 1 | 1 | | 0 | 1.76 | 1 |
Category | Total | Yes | percent |
Considering new ILS | 88 |
1 | 1.14% |
Considering new Interface | 88 |
0 | 0.00% |
System Installed on time? | 88 |
0 | 0.00% |
Average Collection size: |
| 38318 |
Type | Count |
Public | 88 |
Academic | 0 |
School | 0 |
Consortium | 0 |
Special | 0 |
Size Category | Count |
[1] Under 10,000 | 4 |
[2] 10,001-100,000 | 76 |
[3] 100,001-250,000 | 6 |
[4] 250,001-1,000,000 | 0 |
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,000 | 0 |
[6] over 10,000,001 | 0 |
2019 Survey Results |
Product: Apollo |
Response Distribution |
Statistics |
Category | Responses |
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
Mode | Mean | Median |
ILS Satisfaction | 100 |
| | | | | | 2 | 10 | 26 | 62 | 9 | 8.48 | 9 |
ILS Functionality | 98 |
| | | | 1 | 1 | 4 | 11 | 30 | 51 | 9 | 8.26 | 9 |
Print Functionality | 99 |
| | | | | 2 | 1 | 9 | 27 | 60 | 9 | 8.43 | 9 |
Electronic Functionality | 97 |
3 | | | | 1 | 2 | 2 | 12 | 31 | 46 | 9 | 7.96 | 8 |
Company Satisfaction | 100 |
| | | | | | 2 | 3 | 23 | 72 | 9 | 8.65 | 9 |
Support Satisfaction | 99 |
| | | | | 2 | 2 | 2 | 21 | 72 | 9 | 8.61 | 9 |
Support Improvement | 95 |
| | | | 2 | 15 | 5 | 8 | 16 | 49 | 9 | 7.77 | 9 |
Company Loyalty | 94 |
1 | | | | 1 | 7 | 2 | 4 | 18 | 61 | 9 | 8.21 | 9 |
Open Source Interest | 94 |
47 | 4 | 14 | 2 | 2 | 11 | 7 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 0 | 2.12 | 1 |
Category | Total | Yes | percent |
Considering new ILS | 102 |
2 | 1.96% |
Considering new Interface | 102 |
1 | 0.98% |
System Installed on time? | 102 |
91 | 89.22% |
Average Collection size: |
| 36611 |
Type | Count |
Public | 101 |
Academic | 0 |
School | 0 |
Consortium | 1 |
Special | 0 |
Size Category | Count |
[1] Under 10,000 | 4 |
[2] 10,001-100,000 | 91 |
[3] 100,001-250,000 | 7 |
[4] 250,001-1,000,000 | 0 |
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,000 | 0 |
[6] over 10,000,001 | 0 |
2018 Survey Results |
Product: Apollo |
Response Distribution |
Statistics |
Category | Responses |
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
Mode | Mean | Median |
ILS Satisfaction | 112 |
| | | | | 1 | 2 | 11 | 31 | 67 | 9 | 8.44 | 9 |
ILS Functionality | 112 |
| | | | | 1 | 5 | 11 | 40 | 55 | 9 | 8.28 | 8 |
Print Functionality | 111 |
2 | | | | 1 | 2 | 2 | 11 | 30 | 63 | 9 | 8.20 | 9 |
Electronic Functionality | 110 |
1 | | | | | 4 | 7 | 17 | 37 | 44 | 9 | 7.94 | 8 |
Company Satisfaction | 109 |
| | | | | 1 | 1 | 8 | 19 | 80 | 9 | 8.61 | 9 |
Support Satisfaction | 109 |
| | | 1 | | 1 | 2 | 8 | 21 | 76 | 9 | 8.51 | 9 |
Support Improvement | 109 |
1 | | | 1 | 6 | 17 | 6 | 9 | 21 | 48 | 9 | 7.44 | 8 |
Company Loyalty | 110 |
| | | | | 2 | 3 | 11 | 21 | 73 | 9 | 8.45 | 9 |
Open Source Interest | 106 |
58 | 9 | 9 | 5 | 9 | 10 | 4 | | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1.59 | 0 |
Category | Total | Yes | percent |
Considering new ILS | 112 |
3 | 2.68% |
Considering new Interface | 112 |
2 | 1.79% |
System Installed on time? | 112 |
109 | 97.32% |
Average Collection size: |
| 34660 |
Type | Count |
Public | 109 |
Academic | 0 |
School | 0 |
Consortium | 1 |
Special | 0 |
Size Category | Count |
[1] Under 10,000 | 11 |
[2] 10,001-100,000 | 96 |
[3] 100,001-250,000 | 5 |
[4] 250,001-1,000,000 | 0 |
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,000 | 0 |
[6] over 10,000,001 | 0 |
Statistics according to type and size categories
The following table presents the 2017 results according to the type and size of the library.
Apollo | all | Academic | Public | School | Consortium |
| | small | medium | large | small | medium | large | | |
| n | avg | n | avg | n | avg | n | avg | n | avg | n | avg | n | avg | n | avg | n | avg |
SatisfactionLevelILS | 131 | 8.51 |
0 | | 0 | | 0 | | 130 | 8.51 | 0 | | 0 | | 0 | | 0 | |
ILSFunctionality | 130 | 8.27 |
0 | | 0 | | 0 | | 129 | 8.27 | 0 | | 0 | | 0 | | 0 | |
PrintFunctionality | 131 | 8.19 |
0 | | 0 | | 0 | | 130 | 8.18 | 0 | | 0 | | 0 | | 0 | |
ElectronicFunctionality | 130 | 7.99 |
0 | | 0 | | 0 | | 129 | 8.00 | 0 | | 0 | | 0 | | 0 | |
SatisfactionCustomerSupport | 129 | 8.57 |
0 | | 0 | | 0 | | 128 | 8.58 | 0 | | 0 | | 0 | | 0 | |
CompanyLoyalty | 130 | 8.50 |
0 | | 0 | | 0 | | 129 | 8.50 | 0 | | 0 | | 0 | | 0 | |
2017 Survey Results |
Product: Apollo |
Response Distribution |
Statistics |
Category | Responses |
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
Mode | Mean | Median |
ILS Satisfaction | 131 |
| | | | 1 | | 5 | 6 | 32 | 87 | 9 | 8.51 | 9 |
ILS Functionality | 130 |
| | | | 1 | 1 | 4 | 13 | 48 | 63 | 9 | 8.27 | 8 |
Print Functionality | 131 |
2 | | | 1 | 2 | 3 | 5 | 6 | 33 | 79 | 9 | 8.19 | 9 |
Electronic Functionality | 130 |
3 | | | | 2 | 3 | 6 | 12 | 40 | 64 | 9 | 7.99 | 8 |
Company Satisfaction | 131 |
| | | | 2 | | 2 | 8 | 25 | 94 | 9 | 8.56 | 9 |
Support Satisfaction | 129 |
| | 1 | 1 | | 1 | 1 | 8 | 19 | 98 | 9 | 8.57 | 9 |
Support Improvement | 124 |
| 1 | | 1 | 3 | 25 | 4 | 9 | 20 | 61 | 9 | 7.56 | 8 |
Company Loyalty | 130 |
| | 1 | | 1 | 2 | 3 | 10 | 16 | 97 | 9 | 8.50 | 9 |
Open Source Interest | 130 |
73 | 9 | 15 | 7 | 12 | 8 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 1.49 | 0 |
Category | Total | Yes | percent |
Considering new ILS | 134 |
0 | 0.00% |
Considering new Interface | 134 |
2 | 1.49% |
System Installed on time? | 134 |
126 | 94.03% |
Average Collection size: |
| 31609 |
Type | Count |
Public | 133 |
Academic | 0 |
School | 0 |
Consortium | 0 |
Special | 0 |
Size Category | Count |
[1] Under 10,000 | 13 |
[2] 10,001-100,000 | 116 |
[3] 100,001-250,000 | 5 |
[4] 250,001-1,000,000 | 0 |
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,000 | 0 |
[6] over 10,000,001 | 0 |
2016 Survey Results |
Product: Apollo |
Response Distribution |
Statistics |
Category | Responses |
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
Mode | Mean | Median |
ILS Satisfaction | 102 |
| 1 | | | | 1 | 2 | 5 | 23 | 70 | 9 | 8.50 | 9 |
ILS Functionality | 103 |
| 1 | | | 1 | 1 | 3 | 6 | 31 | 60 | 9 | 8.33 | 9 |
Print Functionality | 103 |
1 | | | | 1 | 2 | 1 | 6 | 23 | 69 | 9 | 8.42 | 9 |
Electronic Functionality | 103 |
3 | | | | | 3 | 2 | 10 | 25 | 60 | 9 | 8.13 | 9 |
Company Satisfaction | 102 |
1 | | | | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 17 | 78 | 9 | 8.54 | 9 |
Support Satisfaction | 102 |
1 | 1 | | 1 | 1 | 2 | | 2 | 14 | 80 | 9 | 8.47 | 9 |
Support Improvement | 98 |
2 | | 1 | 1 | 3 | 15 | | 8 | 16 | 52 | 9 | 7.59 | 9 |
Company Loyalty | 102 |
4 | | 1 | | 3 | 1 | 4 | 1 | 19 | 69 | 9 | 8.07 | 9 |
Open Source Interest | 102 |
44 | 17 | 10 | 5 | 14 | 6 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 0 | 1.82 | 1 |
Category | Total | Yes | percent |
Considering new ILS | 106 |
1 | 0.94% |
Considering new Interface | 106 |
1 | 0.94% |
System Installed on time? | 106 |
102 | 96.23% |
Average Collection size: |
| 32330 |
Type | Count |
Public | 106 |
Academic | 0 |
School | 0 |
Consortium | 0 |
Special | 0 |
Size Category | Count |
[1] Under 10,000 | 6 |
[2] 10,001-100,000 | 95 |
[3] 100,001-250,000 | 4 |
[4] 250,001-1,000,000 | 0 |
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,000 | 0 |
[6] over 10,000,001 | 0 |
2015 Survey Results |
Product: Apollo |
Response Distribution |
Statistics |
Category | Responses |
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
Mode | Mean | Median |
ILS Satisfaction | 110 |
| | | | | 1 | | 7 | 23 | 79 | 9 | 8.63 | 9 |
ILS Functionality | 109 |
| | | | | 1 | 2 | 7 | 33 | 66 | 9 | 8.48 | 9 |
Print Functionality | 110 |
| 1 | | | | 1 | 2 | 5 | 23 | 78 | 9 | 8.54 | 9 |
Electronic Functionality | 105 |
2 | 1 | | | | 2 | 4 | 9 | 23 | 64 | 9 | 8.17 | 9 |
Company Satisfaction | 110 |
| | | | 1 | | | 4 | 18 | 87 | 9 | 8.72 | 9 |
Support Satisfaction | 109 |
| | | | | | | 5 | 14 | 90 | 9 | 8.78 | 9 |
Support Improvement | 105 |
| | | | 2 | 16 | 2 | 5 | 17 | 63 | 9 | 7.98 | 9 |
Company Loyalty | 108 |
3 | | 1 | | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 16 | 83 | 9 | 8.38 | 9 |
Open Source Interest | 104 |
53 | 11 | 11 | 9 | 5 | 6 | 2 | 3 | | 4 | 0 | 1.72 | 0 |
Category | Total | Yes | percent |
Considering new ILS | 113 |
4 | 3.54% |
Considering new Interface | 113 |
3 | 2.65% |
System Installed on time? | 113 |
107 | 94.69% |
Average Collection size: |
| 29898 |
Type | Count |
Public | 113 |
Academic | 0 |
School | 0 |
Consortium | 0 |
Special | 0 |
Size Category | Count |
[1] Under 10,000 | 9 |
[2] 10,001-100,000 | 101 |
[3] 100,001-250,000 | 3 |
[4] 250,001-1,000,000 | 0 |
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,000 | 0 |
[6] over 10,000,001 | 0 |
2014 Survey Results |
Product: Apollo |
Response Distribution |
Statistics |
Category | Responses |
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
Mode | Mean | Median |
ILS Satisfaction | 73 |
| | | | | 1 | | 6 | 19 | 47 | 9 | 8.52 | 9 |
ILS Functionality | 73 |
| | | | | 1 | 2 | 5 | 32 | 33 | 9 | 8.29 | 8 |
Print Functionality | 73 |
| | | | 1 | | 2 | 3 | 19 | 48 | 9 | 8.51 | 9 |
Electronic Functionality | 70 |
| | | | 1 | 2 | 2 | 5 | 22 | 38 | 9 | 8.27 | 9 |
Company Satisfaction | 73 |
| | | | | 1 | | 4 | 17 | 51 | 9 | 8.60 | 9 |
Support Satisfaction | 72 |
| | | 1 | | | 1 | 1 | 15 | 54 | 9 | 8.64 | 9 |
Support Improvement | 71 |
| | | 1 | 3 | 8 | 3 | 2 | 16 | 38 | 9 | 7.85 | 9 |
Company Loyalty | 72 |
| | | | 1 | | | 2 | 12 | 57 | 9 | 8.71 | 9 |
Open Source Interest | 70 |
34 | 10 | 7 | 2 | 8 | 5 | | 1 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 1.71 | 1 |
Category | Total | Yes | percent |
Considering new ILS | 74 |
0 | 0.00% |
Considering new Interface | 74 |
0 | 0.00% |
System Installed on time? | 74 |
71 | 95.95% |
Average Collection size: |
| 25299 |
Type | Count |
Public | 74 |
Academic | 0 |
School | 0 |
Consortium | 0 |
Special | 0 |
Size Category | Count |
[1] Under 10,000 | 6 |
[2] 10,001-100,000 | 67 |
[3] 100,001-250,000 | 0 |
[4] 250,001-1,000,000 | 0 |
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,000 | 0 |
[6] over 10,000,001 | 0 |
2013 Survey Results |
Product: Apollo |
Response Distribution |
Statistics |
Category | Responses |
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
Mode | Mean | Median |
ILS Satisfaction | 54 |
| | | | 1 | | | 3 | 14 | 36 | 9 | 8.54 | 9 |
ILS Functionality | 54 |
| | | | | 1 | 1 | 4 | 17 | 31 | 9 | 8.41 | 9 |
Print Functionality | 53 |
| | | | | | 1 | 3 | 15 | 34 | 9 | 8.55 | 9 |
Electronic Functionality | 53 |
| 1 | | | | | 1 | 9 | 8 | 34 | 9 | 8.30 | 9 |
Company Satisfaction | 54 |
| | | | | 1 | | 2 | 8 | 43 | 9 | 8.70 | 9 |
Support Satisfaction | 54 |
| | | | | 1 | | 1 | 9 | 43 | 9 | 8.72 | 9 |
Support Improvement | 53 |
| | | | 1 | 11 | | 3 | 6 | 32 | 9 | 7.85 | 9 |
Company Loyalty | 53 |
1 | | | | | | 1 | 1 | 8 | 42 | 9 | 8.58 | 9 |
Open Source Interest | 52 |
25 | 6 | 5 | | 5 | 5 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 2.04 | 1 |
Category | Total | Yes | percent |
Considering new ILS | 54 |
0 | 0.00% |
Considering new Interface | 54 |
0 | 0.00% |
System Installed on time? | 54 |
54 | 100.00% |
Average Collection size: |
| 30980 |
Type | Count |
Public | 54 |
Academic | 0 |
School | 0 |
Consortium | 0 |
Special | 0 |
Size Category | Count |
[1] Under 10,000 | 7 |
[2] 10,001-100,000 | 46 |
[3] 100,001-250,000 | 1 |
[4] 250,001-1,000,000 | 0 |
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,000 | 0 |
[6] over 10,000,001 | 0 |
2012 Survey Results |
Product: Apollo |
Response Distribution |
Statistics |
Category | Responses |
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
Mode | Mean | Median |
ILS Satisfaction | 114 |
| | | | | 1 | 1 | 11 | 23 | 78 | 9 | 8.54 | 9 |
ILS Functionality | 114 |
| | | | | | 2 | 15 | 27 | 70 | 9 | 8.45 | 9 |
Print Functionality | 0 |
| | | | | | | | | | 0 | 0.00 | |
Electronic Functionality | 0 |
| | | | | | | | | | 0 | 0.00 | |
Company Satisfaction | 113 |
| | | | | 2 | | 3 | 18 | 90 | 9 | 8.72 | 9 |
Support Satisfaction | 114 |
| | | | | | | 5 | 18 | 91 | 9 | 8.75 | 9 |
Support Improvement | 111 |
| | | | | 15 | 6 | 12 | 16 | 62 | 9 | 7.94 | 9 |
Company Loyalty | 112 |
3 | | | | | | 4 | 6 | 19 | 80 | 9 | 8.38 | 9 |
Open Source Interest | 112 |
58 | 10 | 10 | 8 | 5 | 13 | 1 | 1 | | 6 | 0 | 1.84 | 0 |
Category | Total | Yes | percent |
Considering new ILS | 118 |
0 | 0.00% |
Considering new Interface | 118 |
0 | 0.00% |
System Installed on time? | 118 |
114 | 96.61% |
Average Collection size: |
| 25686 |
Type | Count |
Public | 118 |
Academic | 0 |
School | 0 |
Consortium | 0 |
Special | 0 |
Size Category | Count |
[1] Under 10,000 | 17 |
[2] 10,001-100,000 | 99 |
[3] 100,001-250,000 | 1 |
[4] 250,001-1,000,000 | 0 |
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,000 | 0 |
[6] over 10,000,001 | 0 |
2011 Survey Results |
Product: Apollo |
Response Distribution |
Statistics |
Category | Responses |
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
Mode | Mean | Median |
ILS Satisfaction | 53 |
| | | | | | 1 | 4 | 10 | 38 | 9 | 8.60 | 9 |
ILS Functionality | 52 |
| | | | | 1 | 3 | 1 | 17 | 30 | 9 | 8.38 | 9 |
Print Functionality | 0 |
| | | | | | | | | | 0 | 0.00 | |
Electronic Functionality | 0 |
| | | | | | | | | | 0 | 0.00 | |
Company Satisfaction | 53 |
| | | | | | 1 | 2 | 11 | 39 | 9 | 8.66 | 9 |
Support Satisfaction | 53 |
| | | | | | | 4 | 9 | 40 | 9 | 8.68 | 9 |
Support Improvement | 50 |
| | | 1 | 1 | 6 | 3 | 3 | 9 | 27 | 9 | 7.82 | 9 |
Company Loyalty | 53 |
| | | | 1 | 1 | | 1 | 5 | 45 | 9 | 8.70 | 9 |
Open Source Interest | 51 |
22 | 7 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 6 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 2.24 | 1 |
Category | Total | Yes | percent |
Considering new ILS | 54 |
0 | 0.00% |
Considering new Interface | 54 |
0 | 0.00% |
System Installed on time? | 54 |
52 | 96.30% |
Average Collection size: |
| 32723 |
Type | Count |
Public | 53 |
Academic | 0 |
School | 0 |
Consortium | 0 |
Special | 0 |
Size Category | Count |
[1] Under 10,000 | 4 |
[2] 10,001-100,000 | 46 |
[3] 100,001-250,000 | 3 |
[4] 250,001-1,000,000 | 0 |
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,000 | 0 |
[6] over 10,000,001 | 0 |
2010 Survey Results |
Product: Apollo |
Response Distribution |
Statistics |
Category | Responses |
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
Mode | Mean | Median |
ILS Satisfaction | 81 |
| | | | | | 2 | 7 | 14 | 58 | 9 | 8.58 | 9 |
ILS Functionality | 0 |
| | | | | | | | | | 0 | 0.00 | |
Print Functionality | 0 |
| | | | | | | | | | 0 | 0.00 | |
Electronic Functionality | 0 |
| | | | | | | | | | 0 | 0.00 | |
Company Satisfaction | 81 |
| | | | | 1 | 1 | 3 | 10 | 66 | 9 | 8.72 | 9 |
Support Satisfaction | 81 |
| | | | | 2 | 1 | | 9 | 69 | 9 | 8.75 | 9 |
Support Improvement | 80 |
| | | | | 7 | 1 | 11 | 11 | 50 | 9 | 8.20 | 9 |
Company Loyalty | 81 |
| | | 1 | | 1 | | 3 | 8 | 68 | 9 | 8.70 | 9 |
Open Source Interest | 78 |
34 | 8 | 7 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 1 | | | 4 | 0 | 2.08 | 1 |
Category | Total | Yes | percent |
Considering new ILS | 84 |
0 | 0.00% |
Considering new Interface | 84 |
0 | 0.00% |
System Installed on time? | 84 |
79 | 94.05% |
Average Collection size: |
| 30799 |
Type | Count |
Public | 84 |
Academic | 0 |
School | 0 |
Consortium | 0 |
Special | 0 |
Size Category | Count |
[1] Under 10,000 | 3 |
[2] 10,001-100,000 | 78 |
[3] 100,001-250,000 | 1 |
[4] 250,001-1,000,000 | 0 |
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,000 | 0 |
[6] over 10,000,001 | 0 |
2009 Survey Results |
Product: Apollo |
Response Distribution |
Statistics |
Category | Responses |
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
Mode | Mean | Median |
ILS Satisfaction | 35 |
| | | | | | | 6 | 10 | 19 | 9 | 8.37 | 9 |
ILS Functionality | 0 |
| | | | | | | | | | 0 | 0.00 | |
Print Functionality | 0 |
| | | | | | | | | | 0 | 0.00 | |
Electronic Functionality | 0 |
| | | | | | | | | | 0 | 0.00 | |
Company Satisfaction | 35 |
| | | | | | | | 7 | 28 | 9 | 8.80 | 9 |
Support Satisfaction | 35 |
| | | | | | | 1 | 5 | 29 | 9 | 8.80 | 9 |
Support Improvement | 31 |
| | | | | 1 | 1 | 1 | 9 | 19 | 9 | 8.42 | 9 |
Company Loyalty | 35 |
| | | | | | 1 | 1 | 3 | 30 | 9 | 8.77 | 9 |
Open Source Interest | 35 |
14 | 4 | 2 | 4 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 2.54 | 1 |
Category | Total | Yes | percent |
Considering new ILS | 35 |
0 | 0.00% |
Considering new Interface | 35 |
2 | 5.71% |
System Installed on time? | 35 |
34 | 97.14% |
2008 Survey Results |
Product: Apollo |
Response Distribution |
Statistics |
Category | Responses |
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
Mode | Mean | Median |
ILS Satisfaction | 7 |
| | | | | | | 1 | 4 | 2 | 8 | 8.14 | 8 |
ILS Functionality | 0 |
| | | | | | | | | | 0 | 0.00 | |
Print Functionality | 0 |
| | | | | | | | | | 0 | 0.00 | |
Electronic Functionality | 0 |
| | | | | | | | | | 0 | 0.00 | |
Company Satisfaction | 7 |
| | | | | | | 1 | 3 | 3 | 8 | 8.29 | 8 |
Support Satisfaction | 7 |
| | | | | | | 1 | 3 | 3 | 8 | 8.29 | 8 |
Support Improvement | 0 |
not applicable |
Company Loyalty | 7 |
| | | | | | | 2 | 2 | 3 | 9 | 8.14 | 8 |
Open Source Interest | 6 |
3 | 1 | 1 | 1 | | | | | | | 0 | 1.00 | 1 |
Category | Total | Yes | percent |
Considering new ILS | 7 |
0 | 0.00% |
Considering new Interface | 7 |
0 | 0.00% |
System Installed on time? | 7 |
6 | 85.71% |
2007 Survey Results |
Product: Apollo |
Response Distribution |
Statistics |
Category | Responses |
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
Mode | Mean | Median |
ILS Satisfaction | 4 |
| | | | | | | | 3 | 1 | 8 | 8.25 | 8 |
ILS Functionality | 0 |
| | | | | | | | | | 0 | 0.00 | |
Print Functionality | 0 |
| | | | | | | | | | 0 | 0.00 | |
Electronic Functionality | 0 |
| | | | | | | | | | 0 | 0.00 | |
Company Satisfaction | 7 |
| | | | | | | | 2 | 5 | 9 | 8.71 | 9 |
Support Satisfaction | 7 |
| | | | | | | 1 | 1 | 5 | 9 | 8.57 | 9 |
Support Improvement | 0 |
not applicable |
Company Loyalty | 7 |
| | | | | | | | 2 | 5 | 9 | 8.71 | 9 |
Open Source Interest | 7 |
2 | | | | 1 | 2 | 1 | | | 1 | 0 | 4.14 | 5 |
Category | Total | Yes | percent |
Considering new ILS | 7 |
0 | 0.00% |
Considering new Interface | 7 |
0 | 0.00% |
System Installed on time? | 7 |
1 | 14.29% |
2022 : gen: 8.41 company 8.45 loyalty 8.33 support 8.48
2021 : gen: 8.55 company 8.49 loyalty 8.56 support 8.44
2020 : gen: 8.60 company 8.70 loyalty 8.37 support 8.55
2019 : gen: 8.48 company 8.65 loyalty 8.21 support 8.61
2018 : gen: 8.44 company 8.61 loyalty 8.45 support 8.51
2017 : gen: 8.51 company 8.56 loyalty 8.50 support 8.57
2016 : gen: 8.50 company 8.54 loyalty 8.07 support 8.47
2015 : gen: 8.63 company 8.72 loyalty 8.38 support 8.78
2014 : gen: 8.52 company 8.60 loyalty 8.71 support 8.64
2013 : gen: 8.54 company 8.70 loyalty 8.58 support 8.72
2012 : gen: 8.54 company 8.72 loyalty 8.38 support 8.75
2011 : gen: 8.60 company 8.66 loyalty 8.70 support 8.68
2010 : gen: 8.58 company 8.72 loyalty 8.70 support 8.75
2009 : gen: 8.37 company 8.80 loyalty 8.77 support 8.80
2008 : gen: 8.14 company 8.29 loyalty 8.14 support 8.29
2007 : gen: 8.25 company 8.71 loyalty 8.71 support 8.57
Comments (survey2017)
Biblionix continues to provide the highest level of customer service which is why I didn't say that service improved - I don't see how it could. They are very proactive in meeting our needs such as adding the pop up "Don't forget to offer voter registration form" when we are giving out new library cards. I gave a slightly lower score on the working with electronic resources because the current platform cannot work with Novelist in a way that would really meet our customer's needs.
(Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)
Library staff find Apollo to be a complete dream to work with in comparison to Verso. Overdue reports are quickly and easily accessible without needing to click on multiple menus and set parameters, The patron catalog is colorful and straightforward to use. We've received a great deal of positive feedback from our community since migrating to Biblionix.
The data migration went as scheduled with just a few minor little blips that happened, but it was nothing earth shattering. Customer service has been amazing what very few times I've had to reach out for support.
(Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)
We recently migrated from Atriuum to Apollo and couldn't be happier. Apollo meets more of our needs, and we've been able to streamline so many processes on the staff side more so than we could with our previous ILS.
(Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)
Apollo Biblionix has the BEST customer service I've ever encountered! You talk to a HUMAN and I feel like they know me personally, they are patient and very helpful! They are also always technologically one step ahead and always ready to implement new things libraries want.
(Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)
We continue to be very pleased with the Apollo product and the support provided by Biblionix. The company continually updates the product with new features that I may not have asked for but like very much! I believe Biblionix must have an excellent quality control process because the updates are always installed with zero impact or down time. My only small ding is that they have not been able to provide the seamless integration with our electronic media provider - Overdrive - that we had when we first implemented Apollo. I suspect this is due more to an Overdrive issue than a Biblionix one - but I still wish I could click on an electronic item in my Apollo catalog and be taken directly to that item in Overdrive.
(Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)
Biblionix Apollo continues to deliver exceptional service and very good value for money. Best. ILS. Ever.
(Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)
The team at Biblionix provides exceptional support. They are time sensitive in responding to inquiries, have extensive manual content, and take their customers input for features or problems into consideration. They continually roll out new tweaks to help us and our patrons!
(Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)
Apollo by Biblionix is the BEST! The customer service alone is fantastic, but the product itself is also great and is constantly being improved! They are wonderful to work with!
(Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 9)
We are totally satisfied with Biblionix. The customer service is exemplary. The company adds new features regularly. Customers are encouraged to ask for new features.
(Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)
Our library has been using Apollo for over four years and I'm still convinced it's the best ILS on the market for small to mid sized public libraries.
(Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)
We were excited to start with our new ILS and we had some issues at launch but the customer service team was very helpful. That has not been the case as the year progressed. We struggle to get responses from the vendor and, although we were promised this system is built for the library's needs, we usually receive pushback when we ask for changes or updates that would help us do our jobs better. I'm disappointed in the decline in service since we signed with this ILS. We have a 3 year contract with them and I'm not sure if we will re-sign when the three years are up.
(Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 4)
Used open source in the past...a disaster for a small library. Linux run, server based. Too small for tech support on staff. Local tech companies had no Linux knowledge. DISASTER.
(Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 7)
Biblionix has been a great company to work with. They have been responsive to our needs and we find that updates requested by other Biblionix libraries are useful to us as well.
(Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 9)
We love Apollo! So many great features built in, there is nothing else out there with these features at this price point. And they are working on improvements all the time, never letting it get stale or outdated. It would be incredibly hard to lure us away with any other product or vendor.
(Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 9)
We love the responsiveness and attention to our requests that we get from Apollo. We have used one of their features (VersaCard) to turn our local libraries into a consortium where we each maintain our own system but patrons can use any library, shared cards and catalogs. For small libraries, this is a feature that's not normally available to us and is great for our patrons. My staff and patrons love this system.
(Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)
We are very satisfied with the Apollo system from Biblionix. It meets and exceeds the needs of small to mid sized libraries.
(Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)
Biblionix (Apollo) came to our rescue in a time of need. Athena had crashed with no recovery available and Apollo got us up and running quickly - the customer support is tremendous.
(Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)
--
(Library type: Public; collection size: small)
Re: Customer Service: Got neither better or worse; it has been consistently excellent
Re: Considering an open source ILS: we are completely neutral.
(Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 6)
We converted to Apollo almost 5 years ago and we have been incredibly happy with the ILS system. They are constantly working to make the program better for both the patrons and the librarians.
(Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)
I can't imagine a better system for a small public library.
(Library type: Other; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 9)
Not currently looking to migrate
(Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)
This product is extremely easy to use. It allows us to have 60 volunteers who are able to maneuver easily.
(Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)
I am very satisfied with Apollo. They are constantly updating and improving the services. They also take suggestions from us for improvement ideas. We have a say in what we want our ILS to provide.
(Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 8)
We love the personal service available from Apollo. When we call, we're often able to speak directly to the main programmer, and he follows up to make sure that everything is running in tip-top shape!
(Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 9)