Statistical Report for OPALS
| 2022 Survey Results |
| Product: OPALS |
Response Distribution |
Statistics |
|---|
| Category | Responses |
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
Mode | Mean | Median |
|---|
| ILS Satisfaction | 297 |
| | | 1 | | | 1 | 7 | 17 | 271 | 9 | 8.87 | 9 |
|---|
| ILS Functionality | 295 |
| | | | 1 | 2 | 1 | 5 | 61 | 225 | 9 | 8.71 | 9 |
|---|
| Print Functionality | 296 |
| | | | 1 | | 2 | 2 | 19 | 272 | 9 | 8.89 | 9 |
|---|
| Electronic Functionality | 257 |
2 | 1 | 2 | | | 3 | 3 | 41 | 122 | 83 | 8 | 7.97 | 8 |
|---|
| Company Satisfaction | 296 |
| | | | | 3 | 1 | 5 | 20 | 267 | 9 | 8.85 | 9 |
|---|
| Support Satisfaction | 292 |
| | | | 2 | 1 | | 2 | 49 | 238 | 9 | 8.77 | 9 |
|---|
| Support Improvement | 0 |
| | | | | | | | | | 0 | 0.00 | |
|---|
| Company Loyalty | 290 |
2 | 2 | | | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 32 | 248 | 9 | 8.71 | 9 |
|---|
| Open Source Interest | 97 |
4 | 1 | 3 | 1 | | 9 | 1 | 2 | 4 | 24 | 9 | 8.28 | 10 |
|---|
| Category | Total | Yes | percent |
|---|
| Considering new ILS | 297 |
2 | 0.67% |
|---|
| Considering new Interface | 297 |
3 | 1.01% |
|---|
| System Installed on time? | 297 |
0 | 0.00% |
|---|
| Average Collection size: |
| 95676 |
|---|
| Type | Count |
|---|
| Public | 11 |
|---|
| Academic | 29 |
|---|
| School | 182 |
|---|
| Consortium | 10 |
|---|
| Special | 14 |
|---|
| Size Category | Count |
|---|
| [1] Under 10,000 | 50 |
|---|
| [2] 10,001-100,000 | 184 |
|---|
| [3] 100,001-250,000 | 3 |
|---|
| [4] 250,001-1,000,000 | 12 |
|---|
| [5] 1,000,001-10,000,000 | 6 |
|---|
| [6] over 10,000,001 | 0 |
|---|
| 2021 Survey Results |
| Product: OPALS |
Response Distribution |
Statistics |
|---|
| Category | Responses |
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
Mode | Mean | Median |
|---|
| ILS Satisfaction | 252 |
| | | | | 2 | | 2 | 25 | 223 | 9 | 8.85 | 9 |
|---|
| ILS Functionality | 251 |
| | | | | | 3 | 4 | 56 | 188 | 9 | 8.71 | 9 |
|---|
| Print Functionality | 251 |
| | | | | | 1 | 4 | 15 | 231 | 9 | 8.90 | 9 |
|---|
| Electronic Functionality | 204 |
2 | 1 | 2 | | 1 | 2 | 1 | 34 | 97 | 64 | 8 | 7.92 | 8 |
|---|
| Company Satisfaction | 247 |
| | | 1 | | | | 1 | 44 | 201 | 9 | 8.79 | 9 |
|---|
| Support Satisfaction | 250 |
| | 1 | | | | | 1 | 51 | 197 | 9 | 8.76 | 9 |
|---|
| Support Improvement | 0 |
| | | | | | | | | | 0 | 0.00 | |
|---|
| Company Loyalty | 248 |
| | | | 1 | 1 | | 3 | 57 | 186 | 9 | 8.71 | 9 |
|---|
| Open Source Interest | 130 |
4 | 1 | | 2 | | 1 | 1 | 2 | 4 | 55 | 9 | 8.92 | 3 |
|---|
| Category | Total | Yes | percent |
|---|
| Considering new ILS | 253 |
2 | 0.79% |
|---|
| Considering new Interface | 253 |
15 | 5.93% |
|---|
| System Installed on time? | 253 |
0 | 0.00% |
|---|
| Average Collection size: |
| 113901 |
|---|
| Type | Count |
|---|
| Public | 7 |
|---|
| Academic | 30 |
|---|
| School | 95 |
|---|
| Consortium | 8 |
|---|
| Special | 13 |
|---|
| Size Category | Count |
|---|
| [1] Under 10,000 | 37 |
|---|
| [2] 10,001-100,000 | 157 |
|---|
| [3] 100,001-250,000 | 3 |
|---|
| [4] 250,001-1,000,000 | 11 |
|---|
| [5] 1,000,001-10,000,000 | 6 |
|---|
| [6] over 10,000,001 | 0 |
|---|
| 2020 Survey Results |
| Product: OPALS |
Response Distribution |
Statistics |
|---|
| Category | Responses |
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
Mode | Mean | Median |
|---|
| ILS Satisfaction | 259 |
| | | | | | 2 | 7 | 25 | 225 | 9 | 8.83 | 9 |
|---|
| ILS Functionality | 255 |
| | | | | | 1 | 5 | 62 | 187 | 9 | 8.71 | 9 |
|---|
| Print Functionality | 258 |
| | | | | | | 5 | 19 | 234 | 9 | 8.89 | 9 |
|---|
| Electronic Functionality | 245 |
| | 1 | | | 2 | 2 | 49 | 102 | 89 | 8 | 8.10 | 8 |
|---|
| Company Satisfaction | 254 |
| | | | | | 1 | 3 | 36 | 214 | 9 | 8.82 | 9 |
|---|
| Support Satisfaction | 251 |
| | | | | 1 | | 2 | 47 | 201 | 9 | 8.78 | 9 |
|---|
| Support Improvement | 0 |
| | | | | | | | | | 0 | 0.00 | |
|---|
| Company Loyalty | 256 |
1 | | | | | | 1 | 2 | 52 | 200 | 9 | 8.73 | 9 |
|---|
| Open Source Interest | 45 |
6 | | 3 | 2 | 1 | 1 | | 1 | 1 | 16 | 9 | 7.11 | 2 |
|---|
| Category | Total | Yes | percent |
|---|
| Considering new ILS | 261 |
5 | 1.92% |
|---|
| Considering new Interface | 261 |
0 | 0.00% |
|---|
| System Installed on time? | 261 |
0 | 0.00% |
|---|
| Average Collection size: |
| 96991 |
|---|
| Type | Count |
|---|
| Public | 7 |
|---|
| Academic | 26 |
|---|
| School | 165 |
|---|
| Consortium | 8 |
|---|
| Special | 10 |
|---|
| Size Category | Count |
|---|
| [1] Under 10,000 | 40 |
|---|
| [2] 10,001-100,000 | 173 |
|---|
| [3] 100,001-250,000 | 3 |
|---|
| [4] 250,001-1,000,000 | 9 |
|---|
| [5] 1,000,001-10,000,000 | 6 |
|---|
| [6] over 10,000,001 | 0 |
|---|
| 2019 Survey Results |
| Product: OPALS |
Response Distribution |
Statistics |
|---|
| Category | Responses |
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
Mode | Mean | Median |
|---|
| ILS Satisfaction | 283 |
| | | | 2 | 1 | 2 | 12 | 19 | 247 | 9 | 8.78 | 9 |
|---|
| ILS Functionality | 283 |
| | | | 3 | | 3 | 12 | 37 | 228 | 9 | 8.70 | 9 |
|---|
| Print Functionality | 284 |
| | | | 2 | | 1 | 7 | 23 | 251 | 9 | 8.82 | 9 |
|---|
| Electronic Functionality | 227 |
2 | | | | 2 | 3 | 7 | 40 | 93 | 80 | 8 | 7.97 | 8 |
|---|
| Company Satisfaction | 280 |
| | | 1 | 1 | | 2 | 5 | 29 | 242 | 9 | 8.80 | 9 |
|---|
| Support Satisfaction | 282 |
| | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 33 | 239 | 9 | 8.74 | 9 |
|---|
| Support Improvement | 263 |
1 | | | 1 | 4 | 13 | 3 | 13 | 119 | 109 | 8 | 8.08 | 8 |
|---|
| Company Loyalty | 276 |
1 | | | | 2 | 5 | 1 | 4 | 50 | 213 | 9 | 8.64 | 9 |
|---|
| Open Source Interest | 272 |
10 | 2 | 1 | | 5 | 2 | | 4 | 24 | 224 | 9 | 8.35 | 9 |
|---|
| Category | Total | Yes | percent |
|---|
| Considering new ILS | 284 |
1 | 0.35% |
|---|
| Considering new Interface | 284 |
19 | 6.69% |
|---|
| System Installed on time? | 284 |
277 | 97.54% |
|---|
| Average Collection size: |
| 89893 |
|---|
| Type | Count |
|---|
| Public | 7 |
|---|
| Academic | 35 |
|---|
| School | 153 |
|---|
| Consortium | 14 |
|---|
| Special | 12 |
|---|
| Size Category | Count |
|---|
| [1] Under 10,000 | 57 |
|---|
| [2] 10,001-100,000 | 159 |
|---|
| [3] 100,001-250,000 | 1 |
|---|
| [4] 250,001-1,000,000 | 17 |
|---|
| [5] 1,000,001-10,000,000 | 4 |
|---|
| [6] over 10,000,001 | 0 |
|---|
| 2018 Survey Results |
| Product: OPALS |
Response Distribution |
Statistics |
|---|
| Category | Responses |
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
Mode | Mean | Median |
|---|
| ILS Satisfaction | 342 |
| | | | | | 1 | 5 | 15 | 321 | 9 | 8.92 | 9 |
|---|
| ILS Functionality | 340 |
| | | | | 1 | 1 | 5 | 23 | 310 | 9 | 8.88 | 9 |
|---|
| Print Functionality | 339 |
| | | | | | | 5 | 13 | 321 | 9 | 8.93 | 9 |
|---|
| Electronic Functionality | 286 |
| | | | 1 | 3 | 2 | 38 | 124 | 118 | 8 | 8.22 | 8 |
|---|
| Company Satisfaction | 338 |
| | | | | | 1 | 2 | 17 | 318 | 9 | 8.93 | 9 |
|---|
| Support Satisfaction | 341 |
| | | | | | 1 | 3 | 21 | 316 | 9 | 8.91 | 9 |
|---|
| Support Improvement | 333 |
| | | | 2 | 4 | 4 | 22 | 143 | 158 | 9 | 8.32 | 8 |
|---|
| Company Loyalty | 340 |
1 | | | 1 | | | 2 | 2 | 49 | 285 | 9 | 8.78 | 9 |
|---|
| Open Source Interest | 325 |
2 | | 3 | | 2 | 1 | | | 47 | 270 | 9 | 8.69 | 9 |
|---|
| Category | Total | Yes | percent |
|---|
| Considering new ILS | 342 |
0 | 0.00% |
|---|
| Considering new Interface | 342 |
65 | 19.01% |
|---|
| System Installed on time? | 342 |
339 | 99.12% |
|---|
| Average Collection size: |
| 102512 |
|---|
| Type | Count |
|---|
| Public | 10 |
|---|
| Academic | 30 |
|---|
| School | 205 |
|---|
| Consortium | 16 |
|---|
| Special | 17 |
|---|
| Size Category | Count |
|---|
| [1] Under 10,000 | 66 |
|---|
| [2] 10,001-100,000 | 207 |
|---|
| [3] 100,001-250,000 | 3 |
|---|
| [4] 250,001-1,000,000 | 15 |
|---|
| [5] 1,000,001-10,000,000 | 8 |
|---|
| [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.
| OPALS | 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 | 261 | 8.85 |
17 | 8.76 | 1 | | 0 | | 7 | 8.57 | 0 | | 0 | | 163 | 8.89 | 8 | 8.88 |
|---|
| ILSFunctionality | 259 | 8.81 |
17 | 8.59 | 1 | | 0 | | 6 | 8.50 | 0 | | 0 | | 162 | 8.85 | 8 | 8.88 |
|---|
| PrintFunctionality | 260 | 8.89 |
17 | 8.71 | 1 | | 0 | | 7 | 8.71 | 0 | | 0 | | 164 | 8.90 | 8 | 8.88 |
|---|
| ElectronicFunctionality | 220 | 8.05 |
16 | 7.81 | 1 | | 0 | | 6 | 7.83 | 0 | | 0 | | 148 | 8.16 | 6 | 6.67 |
|---|
| SatisfactionCustomerSupport | 261 | 8.85 |
17 | 8.82 | 1 | | 0 | | 7 | 8.71 | 0 | | 0 | | 164 | 8.85 | 8 | 8.75 |
|---|
| CompanyLoyalty | 254 | 8.74 |
17 | 8.82 | 1 | | 0 | | 7 | 8.14 | 0 | | 0 | | 160 | 8.77 | 8 | 8.75 |
|---|
| 2017 Survey Results |
| Product: OPALS |
Response Distribution |
Statistics |
|---|
| Category | Responses |
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
Mode | Mean | Median |
|---|
| ILS Satisfaction | 261 |
| | | | | 1 | 3 | 6 | 13 | 238 | 9 | 8.85 | 9 |
|---|
| ILS Functionality | 259 |
| | | | 1 | | 4 | 8 | 15 | 231 | 9 | 8.81 | 9 |
|---|
| Print Functionality | 260 |
| | | | | | 3 | 6 | 8 | 243 | 9 | 8.89 | 9 |
|---|
| Electronic Functionality | 220 |
| | | | | 4 | 2 | 51 | 84 | 79 | 8 | 8.05 | 8 |
|---|
| Company Satisfaction | 259 |
| | | | | 1 | 3 | 2 | 15 | 238 | 9 | 8.88 | 9 |
|---|
| Support Satisfaction | 261 |
| | | | | | 2 | 4 | 25 | 230 | 9 | 8.85 | 9 |
|---|
| Support Improvement | 245 |
| | | | 1 | 10 | 2 | 19 | 111 | 102 | 8 | 8.18 | 8 |
|---|
| Company Loyalty | 254 |
| | | | 2 | 2 | 2 | 5 | 32 | 211 | 9 | 8.74 | 9 |
|---|
| Open Source Interest | 256 |
4 | 2 | | | | 2 | 3 | 1 | 43 | 201 | 9 | 8.55 | 9 |
|---|
| Category | Total | Yes | percent |
|---|
| Considering new ILS | 263 |
0 | 0.00% |
|---|
| Considering new Interface | 263 |
3 | 1.14% |
|---|
| System Installed on time? | 263 |
258 | 98.10% |
|---|
| Average Collection size: |
| 78904 |
|---|
| Type | Count |
|---|
| Public | 9 |
|---|
| Academic | 23 |
|---|
| School | 165 |
|---|
| Consortium | 8 |
|---|
| Special | 12 |
|---|
| Size Category | Count |
|---|
| [1] Under 10,000 | 69 |
|---|
| [2] 10,001-100,000 | 157 |
|---|
| [3] 100,001-250,000 | 0 |
|---|
| [4] 250,001-1,000,000 | 9 |
|---|
| [5] 1,000,001-10,000,000 | 5 |
|---|
| [6] over 10,000,001 | 0 |
|---|
| 2016 Survey Results |
| Product: OPALS |
Response Distribution |
Statistics |
|---|
| Category | Responses |
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
Mode | Mean | Median |
|---|
| ILS Satisfaction | 218 |
| 1 | | 2 | 1 | 3 | 3 | 8 | 27 | 173 | 9 | 8.59 | 9 |
|---|
| ILS Functionality | 218 |
| | 1 | 2 | | 5 | 3 | 10 | 33 | 164 | 9 | 8.54 | 9 |
|---|
| Print Functionality | 218 |
| | | | 1 | 2 | 7 | 9 | 21 | 178 | 9 | 8.67 | 9 |
|---|
| Electronic Functionality | 187 |
1 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 4 | 47 | 80 | 46 | 8 | 7.67 | 8 |
|---|
| Company Satisfaction | 219 |
| 3 | | 1 | | 3 | 2 | 11 | 21 | 178 | 9 | 8.58 | 9 |
|---|
| Support Satisfaction | 215 |
| 2 | | | 2 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 28 | 174 | 9 | 8.63 | 9 |
|---|
| Support Improvement | 204 |
| 1 | | | 4 | 17 | 9 | 54 | 59 | 60 | 9 | 7.58 | 8 |
|---|
| Company Loyalty | 215 |
2 | 1 | | | 1 | 3 | 3 | 7 | 38 | 160 | 9 | 8.52 | 9 |
|---|
| Open Source Interest | 209 |
13 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 1 | | 2 | 44 | 142 | 9 | 7.99 | 9 |
|---|
| Category | Total | Yes | percent |
|---|
| Considering new ILS | 220 |
3 | 1.36% |
|---|
| Considering new Interface | 220 |
3 | 1.36% |
|---|
| System Installed on time? | 220 |
214 | 97.27% |
|---|
| Average Collection size: |
| 70386 |
|---|
| Type | Count |
|---|
| Public | 7 |
|---|
| Academic | 12 |
|---|
| School | 150 |
|---|
| Consortium | 8 |
|---|
| Special | 11 |
|---|
| Size Category | Count |
|---|
| [1] Under 10,000 | 74 |
|---|
| [2] 10,001-100,000 | 117 |
|---|
| [3] 100,001-250,000 | 1 |
|---|
| [4] 250,001-1,000,000 | 11 |
|---|
| [5] 1,000,001-10,000,000 | 4 |
|---|
| [6] over 10,000,001 | 0 |
|---|
| 2015 Survey Results |
| Product: OPALS |
Response Distribution |
Statistics |
|---|
| Category | Responses |
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
Mode | Mean | Median |
|---|
| ILS Satisfaction | 207 |
| | | | 2 | 4 | 3 | 12 | 27 | 159 | 9 | 8.58 | 9 |
|---|
| ILS Functionality | 208 |
| | | | 2 | 4 | 2 | 15 | 37 | 148 | 9 | 8.52 | 9 |
|---|
| Print Functionality | 207 |
| | | | | 4 | 6 | 7 | 30 | 160 | 9 | 8.62 | 9 |
|---|
| Electronic Functionality | 180 |
2 | 1 | | 1 | 3 | 1 | 9 | 26 | 47 | 90 | 9 | 8.02 | 9 |
|---|
| Company Satisfaction | 208 |
| 1 | | 1 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 5 | 18 | 177 | 9 | 8.69 | 9 |
|---|
| Support Satisfaction | 203 |
| | 3 | | | 2 | 2 | 3 | 21 | 172 | 9 | 8.69 | 9 |
|---|
| Support Improvement | 191 |
| | 1 | | 3 | 18 | 5 | 9 | 61 | 94 | 9 | 8.02 | 8 |
|---|
| Company Loyalty | 205 |
2 | | 1 | | 1 | 5 | 3 | 4 | 26 | 163 | 9 | 8.55 | 9 |
|---|
| Open Source Interest | 185 |
10 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 4 | 5 | 2 | 7 | 8 | 146 | 9 | 8.03 | 9 |
|---|
| Category | Total | Yes | percent |
|---|
| Considering new ILS | 214 |
5 | 2.34% |
|---|
| Considering new Interface | 214 |
52 | 24.30% |
|---|
| System Installed on time? | 214 |
205 | 95.79% |
|---|
| Average Collection size: |
| 126100 |
|---|
| Type | Count |
|---|
| Public | 6 |
|---|
| Academic | 12 |
|---|
| School | 140 |
|---|
| Consortium | 18 |
|---|
| Special | 11 |
|---|
| Size Category | Count |
|---|
| [1] Under 10,000 | 81 |
|---|
| [2] 10,001-100,000 | 93 |
|---|
| [3] 100,001-250,000 | 2 |
|---|
| [4] 250,001-1,000,000 | 14 |
|---|
| [5] 1,000,001-10,000,000 | 6 |
|---|
| [6] over 10,000,001 | 0 |
|---|
| 2014 Survey Results |
| Product: OPALS |
Response Distribution |
Statistics |
|---|
| Category | Responses |
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
Mode | Mean | Median |
|---|
| ILS Satisfaction | 129 |
| | | 1 | 2 | | 5 | 6 | 24 | 91 | 9 | 8.48 | 9 |
|---|
| ILS Functionality | 130 |
| | | 1 | 1 | 3 | 7 | 11 | 32 | 75 | 9 | 8.25 | 9 |
|---|
| Print Functionality | 130 |
| | | 1 | 1 | 1 | 5 | 6 | 20 | 96 | 9 | 8.52 | 9 |
|---|
| Electronic Functionality | 108 |
1 | 1 | | 1 | 6 | 3 | 5 | 20 | 38 | 33 | 8 | 7.54 | 8 |
|---|
| Company Satisfaction | 129 |
| 1 | | 1 | | 1 | 1 | 1 | 21 | 103 | 9 | 8.66 | 9 |
|---|
| Support Satisfaction | 128 |
| 1 | | 1 | 1 | | 1 | 1 | 19 | 104 | 9 | 8.66 | 9 |
|---|
| Support Improvement | 123 |
| 1 | | | 1 | 9 | 7 | 12 | 42 | 51 | 9 | 7.89 | 8 |
|---|
| Company Loyalty | 128 |
1 | 1 | | | 1 | 2 | 1 | 5 | 16 | 101 | 9 | 8.54 | 9 |
|---|
| Open Source Interest | 115 |
7 | 3 | 1 | | | 2 | 3 | | 17 | 82 | 9 | 7.89 | 9 |
|---|
| Category | Total | Yes | percent |
|---|
| Considering new ILS | 131 |
3 | 2.29% |
|---|
| Considering new Interface | 131 |
7 | 5.34% |
|---|
| System Installed on time? | 131 |
127 | 96.95% |
|---|
| Average Collection size: |
| 74910 |
|---|
| Type | Count |
|---|
| Public | 3 |
|---|
| Academic | 7 |
|---|
| School | 87 |
|---|
| Consortium | 8 |
|---|
| Special | 4 |
|---|
| Size Category | Count |
|---|
| [1] Under 10,000 | 45 |
|---|
| [2] 10,001-100,000 | 65 |
|---|
| [3] 100,001-250,000 | 0 |
|---|
| [4] 250,001-1,000,000 | 4 |
|---|
| [5] 1,000,001-10,000,000 | 3 |
|---|
| [6] over 10,000,001 | 0 |
|---|
| 2013 Survey Results |
| Product: OPALS |
Response Distribution |
Statistics |
|---|
| Category | Responses |
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
Mode | Mean | Median |
|---|
| ILS Satisfaction | 213 |
| | | | | 1 | 4 | 11 | 26 | 171 | 9 | 8.70 | 9 |
|---|
| ILS Functionality | 213 |
| | | | | 3 | 4 | 14 | 38 | 154 | 9 | 8.58 | 9 |
|---|
| Print Functionality | 213 |
| | | | | | 4 | 7 | 28 | 174 | 9 | 8.75 | 9 |
|---|
| Electronic Functionality | 176 |
| | | | 3 | 3 | 7 | 12 | 59 | 92 | 9 | 8.26 | 9 |
|---|
| Company Satisfaction | 212 |
| | | | | 1 | 2 | 5 | 20 | 184 | 9 | 8.81 | 9 |
|---|
| Support Satisfaction | 212 |
| | | | | 4 | 2 | 3 | 17 | 186 | 9 | 8.79 | 9 |
|---|
| Support Improvement | 196 |
| | | | 1 | 12 | 2 | 6 | 44 | 131 | 9 | 8.41 | 9 |
|---|
| Company Loyalty | 208 |
1 | | | | 1 | 3 | | 5 | 16 | 182 | 9 | 8.75 | 9 |
|---|
| Open Source Interest | 196 |
13 | 1 | | | 2 | 2 | | 4 | 8 | 166 | 9 | 8.19 | 9 |
|---|
| Category | Total | Yes | percent |
|---|
| Considering new ILS | 215 |
1 | 0.47% |
|---|
| Considering new Interface | 215 |
0 | 0.00% |
|---|
| System Installed on time? | 215 |
205 | 95.35% |
|---|
| Average Collection size: |
| 22577 |
|---|
| Type | Count |
|---|
| Public | 2 |
|---|
| Academic | 5 |
|---|
| School | 173 |
|---|
| Consortium | 4 |
|---|
| Special | 9 |
|---|
| Size Category | Count |
|---|
| [1] Under 10,000 | 74 |
|---|
| [2] 10,001-100,000 | 102 |
|---|
| [3] 100,001-250,000 | 1 |
|---|
| [4] 250,001-1,000,000 | 2 |
|---|
| [5] 1,000,001-10,000,000 | 0 |
|---|
| [6] over 10,000,001 | 0 |
|---|
| 2012 Survey Results |
| Product: OPALS |
Response Distribution |
Statistics |
|---|
| Category | Responses |
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
Mode | Mean | Median |
|---|
| ILS Satisfaction | 186 |
| | 1 | 1 | | 1 | 1 | 9 | 30 | 143 | 9 | 8.63 | 9 |
|---|
| ILS Functionality | 186 |
| | | | | 3 | 3 | 13 | 45 | 122 | 9 | 8.51 | 9 |
|---|
| Print Functionality | 0 |
| | | | | | | | | | 0 | 0.00 | |
|---|
| Electronic Functionality | 0 |
| | | | | | | | | | 0 | 0.00 | |
|---|
| Company Satisfaction | 186 |
| | 1 | | | 1 | 1 | 3 | 25 | 155 | 9 | 8.76 | 9 |
|---|
| Support Satisfaction | 184 |
| | 1 | 2 | | | 1 | 5 | 23 | 152 | 9 | 8.70 | 9 |
|---|
| Support Improvement | 168 |
| | 1 | | 1 | 16 | 5 | 5 | 36 | 104 | 9 | 8.18 | 9 |
|---|
| Company Loyalty | 177 |
| 1 | 1 | | 1 | | 2 | 4 | 16 | 152 | 9 | 8.72 | 9 |
|---|
| Open Source Interest | 170 |
6 | | 2 | | 3 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 13 | 140 | 9 | 8.32 | 9 |
|---|
| Category | Total | Yes | percent |
|---|
| Considering new ILS | 187 |
2 | 1.07% |
|---|
| Considering new Interface | 187 |
0 | 0.00% |
|---|
| System Installed on time? | 187 |
184 | 98.40% |
|---|
| Average Collection size: |
| 62626 |
|---|
| Type | Count |
|---|
| Public | 4 |
|---|
| Academic | 4 |
|---|
| School | 136 |
|---|
| Consortium | 8 |
|---|
| Special | 12 |
|---|
| Size Category | Count |
|---|
| [1] Under 10,000 | 78 |
|---|
| [2] 10,001-100,000 | 85 |
|---|
| [3] 100,001-250,000 | 2 |
|---|
| [4] 250,001-1,000,000 | 6 |
|---|
| [5] 1,000,001-10,000,000 | 2 |
|---|
| [6] over 10,000,001 | 0 |
|---|
| 2011 Survey Results |
| Product: OPALS |
Response Distribution |
Statistics |
|---|
| Category | Responses |
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
Mode | Mean | Median |
|---|
| ILS Satisfaction | 79 |
| | | | 1 | 3 | 2 | 7 | 26 | 40 | 9 | 8.20 | 9 |
|---|
| ILS Functionality | 79 |
| | | | 1 | 2 | 5 | 19 | 17 | 35 | 9 | 7.95 | 8 |
|---|
| Print Functionality | 0 |
| | | | | | | | | | 0 | 0.00 | |
|---|
| Electronic Functionality | 0 |
| | | | | | | | | | 0 | 0.00 | |
|---|
| Company Satisfaction | 80 |
| | | | | 1 | 1 | 7 | 23 | 48 | 9 | 8.45 | 9 |
|---|
| Support Satisfaction | 80 |
| | 1 | | 1 | | 3 | 6 | 19 | 50 | 9 | 8.35 | 9 |
|---|
| Support Improvement | 75 |
| | | | 1 | 9 | 4 | 5 | 28 | 28 | 8 | 7.79 | 8 |
|---|
| Company Loyalty | 78 |
| | | | 2 | 1 | 4 | 2 | 12 | 57 | 9 | 8.46 | 9 |
|---|
| Open Source Interest | 52 |
6 | | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | | 1 | 1 | 38 | 9 | 7.31 | 9 |
|---|
| Category | Total | Yes | percent |
|---|
| Considering new ILS | 81 |
1 | 1.23% |
|---|
| Considering new Interface | 81 |
0 | 0.00% |
|---|
| System Installed on time? | 81 |
78 | 96.30% |
|---|
| Average Collection size: |
| 89790 |
|---|
| Type | Count |
|---|
| Public | 0 |
|---|
| Academic | 1 |
|---|
| School | 57 |
|---|
| Consortium | 7 |
|---|
| Special | 4 |
|---|
| Size Category | Count |
|---|
| [1] Under 10,000 | 33 |
|---|
| [2] 10,001-100,000 | 33 |
|---|
| [3] 100,001-250,000 | 2 |
|---|
| [4] 250,001-1,000,000 | 4 |
|---|
| [5] 1,000,001-10,000,000 | 1 |
|---|
| [6] over 10,000,001 | 0 |
|---|
| 2010 Survey Results |
| Product: OPALS |
Response Distribution |
Statistics |
|---|
| Category | Responses |
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
Mode | Mean | Median |
|---|
| ILS Satisfaction | 100 |
| | | | | 2 | 1 | 13 | 20 | 64 | 9 | 8.43 | 9 |
|---|
| ILS Functionality | 0 |
| | | | | | | | | | 0 | 0.00 | |
|---|
| Print Functionality | 0 |
| | | | | | | | | | 0 | 0.00 | |
|---|
| Electronic Functionality | 0 |
| | | | | | | | | | 0 | 0.00 | |
|---|
| Company Satisfaction | 100 |
| | | | | | 3 | 7 | 14 | 76 | 9 | 8.63 | 9 |
|---|
| Support Satisfaction | 99 |
| | | | | | 1 | 5 | 11 | 82 | 9 | 8.76 | 9 |
|---|
| Support Improvement | 96 |
| | | | 1 | 9 | 2 | 3 | 17 | 64 | 9 | 8.27 | 9 |
|---|
| Company Loyalty | 99 |
| | | 1 | 1 | 1 | | 3 | 8 | 85 | 9 | 8.71 | 9 |
|---|
| Open Source Interest | 98 |
5 | 1 | | | | 2 | | 2 | 2 | 86 | 9 | 8.32 | 9 |
|---|
| Category | Total | Yes | percent |
|---|
| Considering new ILS | 106 |
2 | 1.89% |
|---|
| Considering new Interface | 106 |
2 | 1.89% |
|---|
| System Installed on time? | 106 |
97 | 91.51% |
|---|
| Average Collection size: |
| 49191 |
|---|
| Type | Count |
|---|
| Public | 0 |
|---|
| Academic | 1 |
|---|
| School | 90 |
|---|
| Consortium | 6 |
|---|
| Special | 4 |
|---|
| Size Category | Count |
|---|
| [1] Under 10,000 | 35 |
|---|
| [2] 10,001-100,000 | 53 |
|---|
| [3] 100,001-250,000 | 0 |
|---|
| [4] 250,001-1,000,000 | 3 |
|---|
| [5] 1,000,001-10,000,000 | 1 |
|---|
| [6] over 10,000,001 | 0 |
|---|
| 2009 Survey Results |
| Product: OPALS |
Response Distribution |
Statistics |
|---|
| Category | Responses |
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
Mode | Mean | Median |
|---|
| ILS Satisfaction | 42 |
1 | | | 1 | 1 | 1 | | 12 | 8 | 18 | 9 | 7.67 | 8 |
|---|
| ILS Functionality | 0 |
| | | | | | | | | | 0 | 0.00 | |
|---|
| Print Functionality | 0 |
| | | | | | | | | | 0 | 0.00 | |
|---|
| Electronic Functionality | 0 |
| | | | | | | | | | 0 | 0.00 | |
|---|
| Company Satisfaction | 42 |
1 | | | 1 | 1 | 1 | | 5 | 11 | 22 | 9 | 7.93 | 9 |
|---|
| Support Satisfaction | 42 |
1 | | | | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 10 | 25 | 9 | 8.12 | 9 |
|---|
| Support Improvement | 42 |
2 | | | | | 9 | 2 | 5 | 7 | 17 | 9 | 7.17 | 8 |
|---|
| Company Loyalty | 42 |
2 | 1 | | | | 1 | | 1 | 10 | 27 | 9 | 8.00 | 9 |
|---|
| Open Source Interest | 34 |
4 | 1 | | 2 | | 4 | | | | 23 | 9 | 6.88 | 9 |
|---|
| Category | Total | Yes | percent |
|---|
| Considering new ILS | 42 |
0 | 0.00% |
|---|
| Considering new Interface | 42 |
0 | 0.00% |
|---|
| System Installed on time? | 42 |
37 | 88.10% |
|---|
| 5 Responses for OPALS in 2008 |
| 3 Responses for OPALS in 2007 |
2022 : gen: 8.87 company 8.85 loyalty 8.71 support 8.77
2021 : gen: 8.85 company 8.79 loyalty 8.71 support 8.76
2020 : gen: 8.83 company 8.82 loyalty 8.73 support 8.78
2019 : gen: 8.78 company 8.80 loyalty 8.64 support 8.74
2018 : gen: 8.92 company 8.93 loyalty 8.78 support 8.91
2017 : gen: 8.85 company 8.88 loyalty 8.74 support 8.85
2016 : gen: 8.59 company 8.58 loyalty 8.52 support 8.63
2015 : gen: 8.58 company 8.69 loyalty 8.55 support 8.69
2014 : gen: 8.48 company 8.66 loyalty 8.54 support 8.66
2013 : gen: 8.70 company 8.81 loyalty 8.75 support 8.79
2012 : gen: 8.63 company 8.76 loyalty 8.72 support 8.70
2011 : gen: 8.20 company 8.45 loyalty 8.46 support 8.35
2010 : gen: 8.43 company 8.63 loyalty 8.71 support 8.76
2009 : gen: 7.67 company 7.93 loyalty 8.00 support 8.12
Comments (survey2017)
I sooooo appreciate the guys at MediaFlex, and refer them to everyone!!
(Library type: Special; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)
OPALS is a great value. Media Flex offers very responsive customer service. OPALS has seen some very user-friendly improvements (e.g., search suggestions tied to holdings). But some search modes are rather imprecise; and collection management for eSerials, microfiche, and serials could be better.
(Library type: Academic; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 7)
OPALS updates and new features to its ILS continue to amaze me. These updates and new features further enhances its accessibility to our collection and ease of use. The customer service is the best. Webinars on updates and new features are available at my convenience. The quarterly newsletters are full of great information. I love OPALS!
(Library type: School; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 9)
[..]
(Library type: School; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 9)
Have made use of the relatively new provision to add electronic resources to our catalog. Currently adding just PDF files that relate to our congregation's history, to make ino available for research and activities related to 150th anniversary. This has been a welcome provision.
(Library type: Church; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 9)
Great value for money, and good consistent customer service. Some of the features are more appropriate for a school library, and the system works best with Dewey. For example we are unable to correctly print LC call labels after cataloguing, but we just do them manually. Overall we are very satisfied with this product.
(Library type: Medical; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 8)
Bibliofiche continues to provide excellent customer support for OPALS. It is continually adding to the functionality of the product yet remaining affordable for small schools. The product works well in a bilingual (Arabic/English) setting, and the Arabic interface continues to be improved.
(Library type: School; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 9)
If this were a true union catalog, admin duties would be much easier. Wish the user interface had more customization for use with older students.
(Library type: School; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 8)
OPALS' customer support is phenomenal.
Basic acquisitions and serials modules would be helpful.
(Library type: Academic; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 8)
We are in our tenth year using OPALS. The updates change the system, but the support remains at the same high level that attracted us to it almost a decade ago.
(Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)
OPALS continual updates are great!
(Library type: School; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 9)
It is an understatement that I enjoy working with OPALS immensely. OPALS has transformed the [...] Libraries, and I am deeply grateful for all the talented and patient OPALS support staff helping us here at [...].
(Library type: School; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 9)
We do love OPALS. It is a wonderful asset to our organization.
(Library type: Special; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)
Service is outstanding and they actually implement changes suggested by elementary school librarians like me !
(Library type: School; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 9)
Excellent system for our library and very prompt service when needed.
(Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)
Year ten using OPALS and all's well.
(Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)
Awesome!!!
(Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)
So glad the libraries in my area pointed me to OPALS.
(Library type: School; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 9)
We love the frequent updates, friendly tech support, and users meetings.
(Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)
Responsive development and technical support for the past nine years.
(Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)
We have used OPALS for over twelve years. The program has changed with the times, but customer support not. It's superlative!
(Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)
I am so thankful we switched to OPALS!!
(Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)
We have used this system for seven years and are pleased with what it does for our members and staff. It handles our linguistic needs well and service is outstanding.
(Library type: Church; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 9)
An excellent system. We give high marks to their technical support team and consultant librarians. They even answer our cataloging questions.
(Library type: Theology; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)
Des services de soutien technique exceptionnels!
(Library type: Special; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 9)
The updates are timely, support is responsive and Webinar tutorials make it seem like we are working in the same place.
(Library type: Theology; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)
We like OPALS and its service. We have recommended it to other libraries in our area.
(Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)
What a game changer OPALS is for so many libraries in our organization!
(Library type: Theology; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)
Year two and we remain impressed by OPALS and its responsive technical assistants. This year, we implemented self-service checkout. Students easily adapted to it, and our limited staff was freed up for research tutoring and collection development and digital resource integration.
(Library type: Theology; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)
We use the system to manage and provide access to over 40,000 digital resources, in four languages. Teachers access all of these resources from any school within our region.
(Library type: Academic; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)
We adopted OPALS this year. The technology and support have been outstanding. Not sure how to answer question 7 about service being better or worse than last year, so we marked "9" since OPALS support reputation is one of several reasons we switched systems.
(Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)
The OPALS support group made our migration painless. We were pleasantly surprised that their services extended well beyond their system. We greatly appreciated professional library consulting services and not receiving an invoice for them!
(Library type: Theology; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)
Staff is dedicated, passionate and better capable of meeting our needs over our previous vendor. They went above and beyond to clean up our records when we migrated.
(Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)
I appreciate the system's library management capabilities. Students especially like the single login database authentication and discovery searching they started using this year.
(Library type: School; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 9)
Set up was smooth and we’re delighted with the program and the assistance.
(Library type: Theology; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)
We cannot comment on service improvement because this is our first year using OPALS. Neighboring libraries report positive experiences. Our migration was painless and the first year has been great so far.
(Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)
This year we started using self service checkout. It has worked very well and freed me to develop student research skills.
(Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)
OPALS data processing staff migrated over 20,000 of our rudimentary records to an OPALS catalogue for our board to evaluate. They actually fixed many data inconsistencies at no cost! Their librarian instructors provided free tutoring, enabling us to thoroughly evaluate their system using our own catalogue data. Although we are 16,000 km from their offices, we came to feel they were "just down the road." Finally, although our professionally diverse committee took five months to compare and evaluate ILS technologies, we never felt any "sales" pressure to make a decision. Even before we issued the purchase order, we felt comfortable in our new technology neighbourhood.
(Library type: Special; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)
Customer service is incredibly prompt!
(Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)
There is a large shift in our library to eBooks and digital resources. Digital to print ratio is five to one now and OPALS handled this transition (including authentication) well.
(Library type: School; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 9)
OPALS service has been excellent. The staff knowledge and understanding of our technical, operational and academic requirements is outstanding and we compliment them on their product and staff.
(Library type: Technical; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 9)
OPALS/MediaFlex is very responsive to changes in the industry as well as client requests.
(Library type: School; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 9)
Our library migrated to OPALS recently so we cannot comment on whether support has improved or not over the past year. However, the system setup and data migration was efficient, training is professional and we are pleased with the technology so far.
(Library type: Theology; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)
We have used OPALS for the past 12 years. A great support team listens to its community and improves it every year.
(Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)
OPALS has been a dream to work with. The support people are very pleasant, extremely knowledgeable and helpful. I would recommend this system to everyone.
(Library type: School; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 9)
OPALS is doing a great work specially for those who are living in the third world. This is a very good system for library management. We encourage using this system among Sudanese Librarians
(Library type: Academic; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 9)
We implemented OPALS in January 2008. This is our tenth anniversary and we can still write that the system and the people supporting it are terrific!
(Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)
I am just learning how to navigate OPALS in my new position. I have used Follett Destiny for many years. OPALS is not as intuitive as Destiny, so I'm having difficulty figuring out how to complete some tasks.
(Library type: Theology; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 6)
OPALS continues to be an excellent option for [...]. Their newest enhancements increase the ability to support curriculum. And their Arabic interface continues to improve.
(Library type: School; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 9)