Statistical Report for Koha -- ByWater Solutions
Statistics according to type and size categories
The following table presents the 2018 results according to the type and size of the library.
| Koha -- ByWater Solutions | 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 | 128 | 7.77 |
30 | 7.63 | 2 | | 1 | | 63 | 7.95 | 8 | 7.50 | 0 | | 4 | | 4 | |
|---|
| ILSFunctionality | 127 | 7.46 |
30 | 7.37 | 2 | | 1 | | 63 | 7.70 | 8 | 7.00 | 0 | | 4 | | 4 | |
|---|
| PrintFunctionality | 126 | 7.92 |
30 | 7.77 | 2 | | 1 | | 62 | 8.13 | 8 | 7.63 | 0 | | 4 | | 4 | |
|---|
| ElectronicFunctionality | 120 | 6.56 |
30 | 5.97 | 2 | | 0 | | 60 | 6.82 | 8 | 6.38 | 0 | | 4 | | 4 | |
|---|
| SatisfactionCustomerSupport | 124 | 8.09 |
29 | 7.93 | 2 | | 1 | | 61 | 8.08 | 7 | 8.43 | 0 | | 4 | | 4 | |
|---|
| CompanyLoyalty | 127 | 7.92 |
30 | 7.93 | 2 | | 1 | | 63 | 7.92 | 8 | 7.25 | 0 | | 3 | | 4 | |
|---|
| 2018 Survey Results |
| Product: Koha -- ByWater Solutions |
Response Distribution |
Statistics |
|---|
| Category | Responses |
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
Mode | Mean | Median |
|---|
| ILS Satisfaction | 128 |
| | | 1 | 2 | 6 | 3 | 32 | 45 | 39 | 8 | 7.77 | 8 |
|---|
| ILS Functionality | 127 |
| 1 | 1 | | 2 | 5 | 10 | 35 | 50 | 23 | 8 | 7.46 | 8 |
|---|
| Print Functionality | 126 |
1 | 1 | | | 1 | 3 | 7 | 18 | 45 | 50 | 9 | 7.92 | 8 |
|---|
| Electronic Functionality | 120 |
2 | | 2 | 4 | 7 | 14 | 19 | 34 | 21 | 17 | 7 | 6.56 | 7 |
|---|
| Company Satisfaction | 126 |
| | 1 | 2 | 1 | 4 | 4 | 17 | 32 | 65 | 9 | 8.06 | 9 |
|---|
| Support Satisfaction | 124 |
| 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 4 | 14 | 38 | 62 | 9 | 8.09 | 9 |
|---|
| Support Improvement | 122 |
1 | | 2 | 1 | 11 | 19 | 6 | 20 | 26 | 36 | 9 | 7.00 | 8 |
|---|
| Company Loyalty | 127 |
3 | 1 | | | 1 | 5 | 6 | 13 | 33 | 65 | 9 | 7.92 | 9 |
|---|
| Open Source Interest | 112 |
5 | | 1 | 1 | 1 | 4 | | 2 | 2 | 96 | 9 | 8.24 | 9 |
|---|
| Category | Total | Yes | percent |
|---|
| Considering new ILS | 129 |
3 | 2.33% |
|---|
| Considering new Interface | 129 |
8 | 6.20% |
|---|
| System Installed on time? | 129 |
119 | 92.25% |
|---|
| Average Collection size: |
| 124829 |
|---|
| Type | Count |
|---|
| Public | 72 |
|---|
| Academic | 34 |
|---|
| School | 4 |
|---|
| Consortium | 4 |
|---|
| Special | 1 |
|---|
| Size Category | Count |
|---|
| [1] Under 10,000 | 2 |
|---|
| [2] 10,001-100,000 | 88 |
|---|
| [3] 100,001-250,000 | 27 |
|---|
| [4] 250,001-1,000,000 | 6 |
|---|
| [5] 1,000,001-10,000,000 | 3 |
|---|
| [6] over 10,000,001 | 0 |
|---|
| 2017 Survey Results |
| Product: Koha -- ByWater Solutions |
Response Distribution |
Statistics |
|---|
| Category | Responses |
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
Mode | Mean | Median |
|---|
| ILS Satisfaction | 173 |
| | 1 | | 5 | 5 | 10 | 40 | 55 | 57 | 9 | 7.75 | 8 |
|---|
| ILS Functionality | 172 |
| | 1 | | 6 | 9 | 14 | 43 | 62 | 37 | 8 | 7.47 | 8 |
|---|
| Print Functionality | 172 |
2 | | | 1 | 6 | 3 | 10 | 32 | 60 | 58 | 8 | 7.72 | 8 |
|---|
| Electronic Functionality | 164 |
4 | 2 | 7 | 3 | 6 | 22 | 24 | 29 | 46 | 21 | 8 | 6.48 | 7 |
|---|
| Company Satisfaction | 171 |
| 1 | | 1 | 2 | 6 | 11 | 27 | 46 | 77 | 9 | 7.94 | 8 |
|---|
| Support Satisfaction | 171 |
| 1 | | 1 | 3 | 9 | 11 | 25 | 35 | 86 | 9 | 7.93 | 9 |
|---|
| Support Improvement | 164 |
1 | | | 3 | 11 | 37 | 14 | 15 | 38 | 45 | 9 | 6.93 | 8 |
|---|
| Company Loyalty | 169 |
5 | 2 | 4 | | 5 | 14 | 8 | 22 | 31 | 78 | 9 | 7.41 | 8 |
|---|
| Open Source Interest | 158 |
11 | 4 | 1 | | 8 | 5 | 2 | 10 | 9 | 108 | 9 | 7.53 | 9 |
|---|
| Category | Total | Yes | percent |
|---|
| Considering new ILS | 175 |
10 | 5.71% |
|---|
| Considering new Interface | 175 |
17 | 9.71% |
|---|
| System Installed on time? | 175 |
166 | 94.86% |
|---|
| Average Collection size: |
| 90943 |
|---|
| Type | Count |
|---|
| Public | 89 |
|---|
| Academic | 38 |
|---|
| School | 14 |
|---|
| Consortium | 6 |
|---|
| Special | 2 |
|---|
| Size Category | Count |
|---|
| [1] Under 10,000 | 21 |
|---|
| [2] 10,001-100,000 | 108 |
|---|
| [3] 100,001-250,000 | 31 |
|---|
| [4] 250,001-1,000,000 | 10 |
|---|
| [5] 1,000,001-10,000,000 | 1 |
|---|
| [6] over 10,000,001 | 0 |
|---|
| 2016 Survey Results |
| Product: Koha -- ByWater Solutions |
Response Distribution |
Statistics |
|---|
| Category | Responses |
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
Mode | Mean | Median |
|---|
| ILS Satisfaction | 124 |
| 1 | | 1 | 1 | 4 | 8 | 25 | 47 | 37 | 8 | 7.74 | 8 |
|---|
| ILS Functionality | 124 |
| | 2 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 10 | 32 | 52 | 21 | 8 | 7.44 | 8 |
|---|
| Print Functionality | 124 |
3 | | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 6 | 28 | 45 | 37 | 8 | 7.61 | 8 |
|---|
| Electronic Functionality | 120 |
9 | | 3 | 8 | 5 | 8 | 18 | 24 | 30 | 15 | 8 | 6.17 | 7 |
|---|
| Company Satisfaction | 124 |
| 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 10 | 15 | 37 | 56 | 9 | 7.94 | 8 |
|---|
| Support Satisfaction | 121 |
| 1 | 1 | 2 | | 4 | 9 | 11 | 41 | 52 | 9 | 7.90 | 8 |
|---|
| Support Improvement | 110 |
| | 2 | | 3 | 29 | 6 | 18 | 21 | 31 | 9 | 7.00 | 7 |
|---|
| Company Loyalty | 120 |
| 1 | 1 | 1 | 4 | 8 | 6 | 14 | 28 | 57 | 9 | 7.78 | 8 |
|---|
| Open Source Interest | 109 |
8 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 4 | 4 | 1 | 4 | 8 | 77 | 9 | 7.64 | 9 |
|---|
| Category | Total | Yes | percent |
|---|
| Considering new ILS | 125 |
3 | 2.40% |
|---|
| Considering new Interface | 125 |
10 | 8.00% |
|---|
| System Installed on time? | 125 |
121 | 96.80% |
|---|
| Average Collection size: |
| 85491 |
|---|
| Type | Count |
|---|
| Public | 75 |
|---|
| Academic | 28 |
|---|
| School | 4 |
|---|
| Consortium | 1 |
|---|
| Special | 2 |
|---|
| Size Category | Count |
|---|
| [1] Under 10,000 | 16 |
|---|
| [2] 10,001-100,000 | 80 |
|---|
| [3] 100,001-250,000 | 22 |
|---|
| [4] 250,001-1,000,000 | 5 |
|---|
| [5] 1,000,001-10,000,000 | 1 |
|---|
| [6] over 10,000,001 | 0 |
|---|
| 2015 Survey Results |
| Product: Koha -- ByWater Solutions |
Response Distribution |
Statistics |
|---|
| Category | Responses |
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
Mode | Mean | Median |
|---|
| ILS Satisfaction | 152 |
3 | 2 | 1 | 2 | | 7 | 11 | 33 | 50 | 43 | 8 | 7.43 | 8 |
|---|
| ILS Functionality | 152 |
1 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 17 | 37 | 59 | 23 | 8 | 7.20 | 8 |
|---|
| Print Functionality | 150 |
2 | 2 | 2 | 4 | 1 | 5 | 4 | 22 | 56 | 52 | 8 | 7.61 | 8 |
|---|
| Electronic Functionality | 140 |
8 | 2 | 2 | 4 | 7 | 14 | 22 | 27 | 34 | 20 | 8 | 6.35 | 7 |
|---|
| Company Satisfaction | 152 |
3 | 2 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 4 | 12 | 18 | 44 | 63 | 9 | 7.62 | 8 |
|---|
| Support Satisfaction | 149 |
| 2 | 1 | 2 | 4 | 7 | 11 | 21 | 36 | 65 | 9 | 7.70 | 8 |
|---|
| Support Improvement | 145 |
2 | | 1 | | 9 | 36 | 9 | 12 | 21 | 55 | 9 | 7.03 | 8 |
|---|
| Company Loyalty | 146 |
7 | | 2 | 4 | 5 | 8 | 11 | 10 | 32 | 67 | 9 | 7.34 | 8 |
|---|
| Open Source Interest | 130 |
10 | 3 | | 2 | 7 | 4 | 2 | 3 | 11 | 88 | 9 | 7.46 | 9 |
|---|
| Category | Total | Yes | percent |
|---|
| Considering new ILS | 155 |
5 | 3.23% |
|---|
| Considering new Interface | 155 |
16 | 10.32% |
|---|
| System Installed on time? | 155 |
149 | 96.13% |
|---|
| Average Collection size: |
| 101914 |
|---|
| Type | Count |
|---|
| Public | 91 |
|---|
| Academic | 32 |
|---|
| School | 6 |
|---|
| Consortium | 6 |
|---|
| Special | 3 |
|---|
| Size Category | Count |
|---|
| [1] Under 10,000 | 12 |
|---|
| [2] 10,001-100,000 | 100 |
|---|
| [3] 100,001-250,000 | 23 |
|---|
| [4] 250,001-1,000,000 | 13 |
|---|
| [5] 1,000,001-10,000,000 | 2 |
|---|
| [6] over 10,000,001 | 0 |
|---|
| 2014 Survey Results |
| Product: Koha -- ByWater Solutions |
Response Distribution |
Statistics |
|---|
| Category | Responses |
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
Mode | Mean | Median |
|---|
| ILS Satisfaction | 116 |
1 | | 1 | 1 | | 9 | 12 | 30 | 39 | 23 | 8 | 7.34 | 8 |
|---|
| ILS Functionality | 116 |
| | 3 | 1 | 2 | 6 | 18 | 31 | 35 | 20 | 8 | 7.17 | 7 |
|---|
| Print Functionality | 115 |
| | 1 | 1 | | 6 | 9 | 20 | 47 | 31 | 8 | 7.69 | 8 |
|---|
| Electronic Functionality | 112 |
3 | 4 | 2 | 4 | 3 | 11 | 14 | 31 | 28 | 12 | 7 | 6.43 | 7 |
|---|
| Company Satisfaction | 116 |
| 1 | 2 | | 3 | 6 | 8 | 23 | 30 | 43 | 9 | 7.61 | 8 |
|---|
| Support Satisfaction | 115 |
| 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 6 | 12 | 21 | 25 | 46 | 9 | 7.63 | 8 |
|---|
| Support Improvement | 110 |
1 | | 1 | 3 | 9 | 24 | 9 | 16 | 16 | 31 | 9 | 6.73 | 7 |
|---|
| Company Loyalty | 111 |
1 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 6 | 10 | 8 | 9 | 23 | 47 | 9 | 7.26 | 8 |
|---|
| Open Source Interest | 101 |
6 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 5 | 1 | 4 | 12 | 67 | 9 | 7.65 | 9 |
|---|
| Category | Total | Yes | percent |
|---|
| Considering new ILS | 119 |
7 | 5.88% |
|---|
| Considering new Interface | 119 |
12 | 10.08% |
|---|
| System Installed on time? | 119 |
109 | 91.60% |
|---|
| Average Collection size: |
| 97617 |
|---|
| Type | Count |
|---|
| Public | 73 |
|---|
| Academic | 21 |
|---|
| School | 4 |
|---|
| Consortium | 5 |
|---|
| Special | 1 |
|---|
| Size Category | Count |
|---|
| [1] Under 10,000 | 14 |
|---|
| [2] 10,001-100,000 | 72 |
|---|
| [3] 100,001-250,000 | 17 |
|---|
| [4] 250,001-1,000,000 | 9 |
|---|
| [5] 1,000,001-10,000,000 | 1 |
|---|
| [6] over 10,000,001 | 0 |
|---|
| 2013 Survey Results |
| Product: Koha -- ByWater Solutions |
Response Distribution |
Statistics |
|---|
| Category | Responses |
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
Mode | Mean | Median |
|---|
| ILS Satisfaction | 89 |
| | 1 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 8 | 19 | 27 | 28 | 9 | 7.61 | 8 |
|---|
| ILS Functionality | 89 |
1 | | 1 | | 2 | 4 | 9 | 29 | 25 | 18 | 7 | 7.29 | 7 |
|---|
| Print Functionality | 89 |
| | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 15 | 32 | 33 | 9 | 7.84 | 8 |
|---|
| Electronic Functionality | 85 |
3 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 3 | 10 | 12 | 17 | 20 | 14 | 8 | 6.46 | 7 |
|---|
| Company Satisfaction | 89 |
| 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 3 | 5 | 10 | 25 | 41 | 9 | 7.83 | 8 |
|---|
| Support Satisfaction | 88 |
| 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 4 | 3 | 10 | 24 | 42 | 9 | 7.84 | 8 |
|---|
| Support Improvement | 82 |
1 | | 1 | 1 | | 13 | 8 | 11 | 19 | 28 | 9 | 7.30 | 8 |
|---|
| Company Loyalty | 88 |
4 | 2 | 2 | | 1 | 7 | 1 | 9 | 14 | 48 | 9 | 7.48 | 9 |
|---|
| Open Source Interest | 78 |
2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 6 | 2 | 2 | | 62 | 9 | 8.00 | 9 |
|---|
| Category | Total | Yes | percent |
|---|
| Considering new ILS | 91 |
3 | 3.30% |
|---|
| Considering new Interface | 91 |
7 | 7.69% |
|---|
| System Installed on time? | 91 |
86 | 94.51% |
|---|
| Average Collection size: |
| 100698 |
|---|
| Type | Count |
|---|
| Public | 53 |
|---|
| Academic | 21 |
|---|
| School | 3 |
|---|
| Consortium | 2 |
|---|
| Special | 2 |
|---|
| Size Category | Count |
|---|
| [1] Under 10,000 | 5 |
|---|
| [2] 10,001-100,000 | 57 |
|---|
| [3] 100,001-250,000 | 16 |
|---|
| [4] 250,001-1,000,000 | 6 |
|---|
| [5] 1,000,001-10,000,000 | 0 |
|---|
| [6] over 10,000,001 | 0 |
|---|
| 2012 Survey Results |
| Product: Koha -- ByWater Solutions |
Response Distribution |
Statistics |
|---|
| Category | Responses |
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
Mode | Mean | Median |
|---|
| ILS Satisfaction | 63 |
| | | | 1 | 1 | 5 | 14 | 25 | 17 | 8 | 7.78 | 8 |
|---|
| ILS Functionality | 63 |
| | 1 | 1 | | 2 | 4 | 18 | 27 | 10 | 8 | 7.48 | 8 |
|---|
| Print Functionality | 0 |
| | | | | | | | | | 0 | 0.00 | |
|---|
| Electronic Functionality | 0 |
| | | | | | | | | | 0 | 0.00 | |
|---|
| Company Satisfaction | 63 |
| | | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 12 | 11 | 35 | 9 | 8.11 | 9 |
|---|
| Support Satisfaction | 63 |
| 1 | | 1 | | | 2 | 14 | 12 | 33 | 9 | 8.05 | 9 |
|---|
| Support Improvement | 59 |
| 1 | 2 | | 4 | 5 | 5 | 6 | 13 | 23 | 9 | 7.27 | 8 |
|---|
| Company Loyalty | 61 |
| | | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 8 | 8 | 37 | 9 | 8.02 | 9 |
|---|
| Open Source Interest | 57 |
2 | | | | 1 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 45 | 9 | 8.21 | 9 |
|---|
| Category | Total | Yes | percent |
|---|
| Considering new ILS | 65 |
0 | 0.00% |
|---|
| Considering new Interface | 65 |
1 | 1.54% |
|---|
| System Installed on time? | 65 |
59 | 90.77% |
|---|
| Average Collection size: |
| 148035 |
|---|
| Type | Count |
|---|
| Public | 40 |
|---|
| Academic | 11 |
|---|
| School | 3 |
|---|
| Consortium | 2 |
|---|
| Special | 1 |
|---|
| Size Category | Count |
|---|
| [1] Under 10,000 | 4 |
|---|
| [2] 10,001-100,000 | 44 |
|---|
| [3] 100,001-250,000 | 9 |
|---|
| [4] 250,001-1,000,000 | 5 |
|---|
| [5] 1,000,001-10,000,000 | 1 |
|---|
| [6] over 10,000,001 | 0 |
|---|
| 2011 Survey Results |
| Product: Koha -- ByWater Solutions |
Response Distribution |
Statistics |
|---|
| Category | Responses |
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
Mode | Mean | Median |
|---|
| ILS Satisfaction | 59 |
| | 1 | | 1 | 3 | 3 | 13 | 23 | 15 | 8 | 7.61 | 8 |
|---|
| ILS Functionality | 59 |
| 1 | | | 1 | 3 | 9 | 17 | 17 | 11 | 7 | 7.25 | 7 |
|---|
| Print Functionality | 0 |
| | | | | | | | | | 0 | 0.00 | |
|---|
| Electronic Functionality | 0 |
| | | | | | | | | | 0 | 0.00 | |
|---|
| Company Satisfaction | 59 |
| | 2 | | | 1 | 1 | 8 | 18 | 29 | 9 | 8.07 | 8 |
|---|
| Support Satisfaction | 59 |
| | 1 | | | 2 | 3 | 7 | 11 | 35 | 9 | 8.17 | 9 |
|---|
| Support Improvement | 56 |
1 | | | | | 11 | 6 | 4 | 9 | 25 | 9 | 7.43 | 8 |
|---|
| Company Loyalty | 59 |
2 | | | | 2 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 9 | 38 | 9 | 7.98 | 9 |
|---|
| Open Source Interest | 49 |
2 | | | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | | 3 | 38 | 9 | 8.06 | 9 |
|---|
| Category | Total | Yes | percent |
|---|
| Considering new ILS | 62 |
0 | 0.00% |
|---|
| Considering new Interface | 62 |
5 | 8.06% |
|---|
| System Installed on time? | 62 |
59 | 95.16% |
|---|
| Average Collection size: |
| 104566 |
|---|
| Type | Count |
|---|
| Public | 42 |
|---|
| Academic | 7 |
|---|
| School | 3 |
|---|
| Consortium | 2 |
|---|
| Special | 2 |
|---|
| Size Category | Count |
|---|
| [1] Under 10,000 | 7 |
|---|
| [2] 10,001-100,000 | 34 |
|---|
| [3] 100,001-250,000 | 8 |
|---|
| [4] 250,001-1,000,000 | 5 |
|---|
| [5] 1,000,001-10,000,000 | 0 |
|---|
| [6] over 10,000,001 | 0 |
|---|
| 2010 Survey Results |
| Product: Koha -- ByWater Solutions |
Response Distribution |
Statistics |
|---|
| Category | Responses |
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
Mode | Mean | Median |
|---|
| ILS Satisfaction | 37 |
| | | | | 1 | 2 | 12 | 8 | 14 | 9 | 7.86 | 8 |
|---|
| ILS Functionality | 0 |
| | | | | | | | | | 0 | 0.00 | |
|---|
| Print Functionality | 0 |
| | | | | | | | | | 0 | 0.00 | |
|---|
| Electronic Functionality | 0 |
| | | | | | | | | | 0 | 0.00 | |
|---|
| Company Satisfaction | 37 |
| | | | | | | 4 | 14 | 19 | 9 | 8.41 | 9 |
|---|
| Support Satisfaction | 36 |
| | | | | | | 3 | 14 | 19 | 9 | 8.44 | 9 |
|---|
| Support Improvement | 37 |
| | | | | 1 | | 3 | 10 | 23 | 9 | 8.46 | 9 |
|---|
| Company Loyalty | 37 |
| | | | | | | 2 | 6 | 29 | 9 | 8.73 | 9 |
|---|
| Open Source Interest | 37 |
| | | | | | | | | 37 | 9 | 9.00 | 9 |
|---|
| Category | Total | Yes | percent |
|---|
| Considering new ILS | 40 |
1 | 2.50% |
|---|
| Considering new Interface | 40 |
1 | 2.50% |
|---|
| System Installed on time? | 40 |
36 | 90.00% |
|---|
| Average Collection size: |
| 57706 |
|---|
| Type | Count |
|---|
| Public | 26 |
|---|
| Academic | 8 |
|---|
| School | 1 |
|---|
| Consortium | 1 |
|---|
| Special | 1 |
|---|
| Size Category | Count |
|---|
| [1] Under 10,000 | 4 |
|---|
| [2] 10,001-100,000 | 28 |
|---|
| [3] 100,001-250,000 | 5 |
|---|
| [4] 250,001-1,000,000 | 1 |
|---|
| [5] 1,000,001-10,000,000 | 0 |
|---|
| [6] over 10,000,001 | 0 |
|---|
| 1 Responses for Koha -- ByWater Solutions in 2009 |
| 0 Responses for Koha -- ByWater Solutions in 2008 |
| 0 Responses for Koha -- ByWater Solutions in 2007 |
2018 : gen: 7.77 company 8.06 loyalty 7.92 support 8.09
2017 : gen: 7.75 company 7.94 loyalty 7.41 support 7.93
2016 : gen: 7.74 company 7.94 loyalty 7.78 support 7.90
2015 : gen: 7.43 company 7.62 loyalty 7.34 support 7.70
2014 : gen: 7.34 company 7.61 loyalty 7.26 support 7.63
2013 : gen: 7.61 company 7.83 loyalty 7.48 support 7.84
2012 : gen: 7.78 company 8.11 loyalty 8.02 support 8.05
2011 : gen: 7.61 company 8.07 loyalty 7.98 support 8.17
2010 : gen: 7.86 company 8.41 loyalty 8.73 support 8.44
Comments (survey2018)
We are very happy with Bywater Solutions. Their attitude towards us is professional and collegial, and lacks any of the paternalism of companies like Follett, who think they know best what you need.
Bywater have worked with us in a very responsive way to customize our OPAC, and their entire approach to Koha is creative, forward-looking and inviting of criticism and improvements.
The functionality of Koha and its integration with other products like Ebsco's Novelist Select and Overdrive is really fantastic.
Ebsco Discovery also worked with us in an extremely helpful way to implement a discovery page for our elementary students.
We are so pleased that we made the switch from Follett Destiny. One of the best decisions we've made.
(Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 8)
We love Koha in part because we can custom fit it to this library. There are many tweaks and adjustments we can perform ourselves. For example, we can change circulation rules within minutes. And because it is basically international, we can do little things so as to make our community feel welcome, such as offering the catalog interface in Amharic, Arabic, and many other languages.
This past year we decided to implement automatic renewals. It took very little time to get this new procedure operating almost exactly as we had wished, and it has been wildly popular among our library users.
We find the customer support at ByWater amazing and unusual. We especially appreciate their instant response to the rare Sunday afternoon question - not only answering the call but immediately working with us to resolve the problem.
Upgrades? Our previous vendor insisted we close the library so as to fit their 9-5 schedule. ByWater performs them during the night, when we are closed. Little differences like that translate into better public service.
(Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 9)
Our State Library has become our tech support gateway, and it is working out well for both of us.
(Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 8)
Our Alma/Primo system will go live in January, 2019, as part of the [...] library consortium. Koha was a decent product, but much of the functionality we lacked after 3+ years required extra money to develop with ByWater Solutions. We were never happy about that. Additionally, one of our member libraries made the leap to Alma/Primo early in the year, so the rest of us decided to follow.
(Library type: Academic; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 4)
Re: "How effective is this product in managing your library's electronic resources?": We don't include them in our ILS. There was N/A option so the neutral 5 was in place of that.
(Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 8)
Customer service has always been exceptional, there is consistently a quick response and a solution whenever a question is asked. Bywater is an outstanding company.
(Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 9)
[...] is in the process of migrating to ByWater Koha and it has been nothing short of exceptional.
(Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 8)
ByWater has been a joy to work with since we started with them 8 years ago. They are quick to respond to tech problems and to help with things I don't know or can't remember how to do. I cannot recommend them enough.
(Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)
none
(Library type: Academic; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 8)
Implementation of new Bywater Koha ILS currently in progress. We have found Bywater to be knowledgable, helpful, responsive, and timely.
(Library type: Academic; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 9)
We switched to Koha supported by ByWater this summer. We are very happy wiht the decision. We are currently switching from Primo, SFX and Primo Central to EDS and their Link Resolver.
(Library type: Academic; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 8)
Koha is getting better and better all the time! As a small special library, our needs are unique compared with larger, public libraries, but Koha's functionality for us is improving with each upgrade. ByWater's support keeps improving as well, as they grow and evolve as a company. We have been very satisfied with their response time/manner.
(Library type: Medical; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 7)
We have been happy with Bywater as a support company for our Koha system. In terms of libraries with large serial sets--there are a few indexing issues if there are too many item records attached to a bib. We have worked around these with a surrogate record that links to the actual record. The acquisitions module can be difficult for libraries that pay tax as there are rounding and calculation issues causing slight variations at times.
(Library type: Law; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 7)
[...]
(Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 9)
Koha ILS is frequently updated and developed via ByWater. The ILS is a solid workhorse that gets the job done, and permits us to leverage sql queries on the backend to build out an assortment of operational improvements within our organization; it is this last boon that makes us most content.
(Library type: Public; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 9)
We are not technically on ByWater hosted services until February
(Library type: Consortium; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 8)
Bywater support is good as long as you are diligent about submitting separate tickets for each issue. It is kind of interesting that you can pay them extra to develop new functionality for the ILS, which then gets incorporated into the Koha codebase.
(Library type: Academic; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 8)
Koha
Searching for known items is difficult & gives too many results. We find the Zebra search very hard to use on the staff side. Too many results returned, no left anchored search or precise index searching available. Prioritizing results is difficult. Adoption of elastic search may resolve some of the issues, but will still be very different from previous ILS.
Posting invoices requires many extra steps over our previous system. Acquisitions is very slow. We have to manually perform many tasks that our previous system did automatically.
Lending rules are not granular enough for an RI higher education institution.
Staff permissions are not granular enough – staff get all or nothing access to functions.
Reports are very powerful but require learning SQL. We've asked the vendor to create many reports for us, which they've encouraged.
Koha seems less stable than our previous system. Things work fine one day and break the next.
Lack of integrated electronic management is a big disappointment.
BWS
BWS is a very collaborative company to work with. All of the staff, up to the COO and EVP, are accessible and hands-on. BWS staff are friendly, easy to work with, and very knowledgeable about Koha.
Vendor is extremely customer focused and listens carefully to our concerns. They worked very closely with us during the migration phase and continue to offer high quality customer service. The staff is eager to learn about our workflow and needs and to help us overcome obstacles we face with Koha.
(Library type: Academic; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 3)
I believe the support team at Bywater are very helpful and responsive. We have been experiencing some frustration with speed, and how long it takes to receive search results. We currently host Koha on our servers, it gets sometimes frustrating or more difficult to get to the root of a problem sometimes, whether it is our servers, or old computers, or internet service, or something on Bywater's end that sometimes you feel you never quite get an ultimate resolution, and you just have to put up with the slowness, as I say frustrating, but the support team at Bywater is responsive and so I am hoping to have this issue resolved and to know where to look when speed goes down.
(Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 5)
The flexibility of open source allows us to customize the ILS to meet the needs of our users. The ability to collaborate with others using Koha is awesome! Bywater is easy to work with as well.
(Library type: Consortium; collection size: large; ils satisfaction: 8)
ByWater Solutions has been hosting our Koha ILS for seven years. Their technical support and overall customer service has been responsive and reliable; especially their willingness to help with report writing. The hosting fees have been very reasonable.
As for Koha, the OPAC, circ module, and cataloging module have served us well and have been relatively easy to maintain. I am a former acquisitions librarian and have always found Koha's acquisitions module counter-intuitive and complicated to work with, but we have gotten used to it.
(Library type: Academic; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 8)
Some questions I couldn't answer because I was not here when our current ILS was implemented. I really like how it works, especially being in a consortium. I do wish there were other search options - such as searching by genre.
(Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 8)
[...]
(Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 7)
We are still in the process of migrating our existing Koha system to being hosted and managed by Bywater Solutions. So far, the transition is going satisfactorily.
(Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 6)
We just signed a contract with ByWater and haven't completed the migration. So I left many of the questions blank. I'm
We were previously with Insignia from March 2018 to December 2018 but never went live with the OPAC.
(Library type: Government Agency; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 9)
Libraries implementing an open source system such as Koha would be well advised to have a technician skilled in the database language to communicate with the vendor as well as to be on hand to troubleshoot issues. The implementation needs to be planned out by the library staff as stated by the vendor and when they ask for something, it needs to be worked on asap. We had a clumsy implementation due to lack of preparation, a lack of understanding as to how difficult the transition would be and a subsequent morale issue as staff tried to work thru the issues. Planning needs to be taken very seriously with a dedicated committee or taskforce and an assigned project manager who schedules regular meetings for input. Everything that is impacted by the system such as databases, etcetera needs to be documented.
The vendor has been very responsive but communication has been an issue so screenshots have been a must. The vendor also wanted to implement during the summer reading program which was not well received and pushed to August. However with the implementation planning starting in April, not as much work was accomplished as was needed due to the summer reading program absorbing so much attention.
It was two weeks at least to get Overdrive working with the system, a month and an half before item processing could resume plus issues with printing receipts at check out and patron notifications on top of weird catalog searching issues for the patrons and staff.
As we gain more understanding of how to work the system, I believe our satisfaction will go up but right now I'm between staff who think it's just great and staff who are 'why did we do this!
(Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 7)
We migrated to KOHA in 2013 with PFTS (LibLime) and it seemed to go well but there was one challenge after another. It turns out they did not update the software, did not tell us of potential updates, were not open to integrations/ideas, and support was a challenge.
We liked KOHA and connected with other vendors to discuss options. Bywater Solutions was great. They migrated all the information for less than $5000, cleared up errors and more. Since then, THEY tell us about scheduled updates, THEY offer suggestions for new steps, THEY provide excellent fast knowledgeable support.
If Bywater moved to a new support I would investigate and be open to ideas as I truly believe they wouldn't move to something that didn't work.
(Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 7)
We have ByWater Solutions Koha and there are almost no reports available, which makes reporting on or analyzing the collection very difficult. We have to design the reports ourselves. It is difficult to get bugs fixed or to get them to understand what the problems are.
(Library type: Academic; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 5)
Through the AspenCat consortium, [...] Library currently uses LibLime-supported Koha.
In February 2019, we are migration to ByWater-supported Koha.
(Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 7)
Bywater as a vendor has been excellent to work with.
There are many improvements within the Acquisitions Module that could make the system better (receiving, paying tracking). Also, searching in the system, billing of patrons, overlaying duplicate records, placing and changing patrons holds and other items could be improved.
(Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 5)
I have worked with five different LSPs in the 10 years I have been in librarianship, and Koha is by far the most intuitive and flexible to our needs. The staff at Bywater is an amazing resource for support and innovation, and the community is fantastic.
(Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 9)
ByWater support is wonderful. We are in constant touch and they are always trying out new ways to educate and help the end user.
(Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 9)