Statistical Report for VERSO
| 2019 Survey Results |
| Product: VERSO |
Response Distribution |
Statistics |
|---|
| Category | Responses |
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
Mode | Mean | Median |
|---|
| ILS Satisfaction | 48 |
| | 5 | 3 | 3 | 4 | 3 | 13 | 11 | 6 | 7 | 6.29 | 7 |
|---|
| ILS Functionality | 48 |
| | 1 | 4 | 3 | 1 | 9 | 11 | 10 | 9 | 7 | 6.73 | 7 |
|---|
| Print Functionality | 48 |
1 | | 1 | 5 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 8 | 15 | 10 | 8 | 6.75 | 8 |
|---|
| Electronic Functionality | 48 |
3 | 3 | | 2 | 6 | 4 | 7 | 5 | 10 | 8 | 8 | 5.88 | 6 |
|---|
| Company Satisfaction | 47 |
| 2 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 7 | 16 | 12 | 8 | 6.94 | 8 |
|---|
| Support Satisfaction | 48 |
| 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | | 3 | 3 | 16 | 20 | 9 | 7.50 | 8 |
|---|
| Support Improvement | 48 |
3 | | 1 | 2 | 4 | 12 | 5 | 3 | 9 | 9 | 5 | 6.00 | 6 |
|---|
| Company Loyalty | 47 |
3 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 5 | 2 | 3 | 8 | 7 | 14 | 9 | 6.32 | 7 |
|---|
| Open Source Interest | 48 |
16 | 6 | 2 | 1 | 8 | 8 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 0 | 2.90 | 3 |
|---|
| Category | Total | Yes | percent |
|---|
| Considering new ILS | 49 |
6 | 12.24% |
|---|
| Considering new Interface | 49 |
4 | 8.16% |
|---|
| System Installed on time? | 49 |
44 | 89.80% |
|---|
| Average Collection size: |
| 35051 |
|---|
| Type | Count |
|---|
| Public | 36 |
|---|
| Academic | 9 |
|---|
| School | 0 |
|---|
| Consortium | 2 |
|---|
| Special | 2 |
|---|
| Size Category | Count |
|---|
| [1] Under 10,000 | 6 |
|---|
| [2] 10,001-100,000 | 40 |
|---|
| [3] 100,001-250,000 | 1 |
|---|
| [4] 250,001-1,000,000 | 1 |
|---|
| [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 2018 results according to the type and size of the library.
| VERSO | 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 | 145 | 7.26 |
15 | 7.00 | 0 | | 0 | | 117 | 7.45 | 3 | | 0 | | 2 | | 3 | |
|---|
| ILSFunctionality | 145 | 7.30 |
15 | 7.00 | 0 | | 0 | | 117 | 7.50 | 3 | | 0 | | 2 | | 3 | |
|---|
| PrintFunctionality | 143 | 7.44 |
15 | 7.27 | 0 | | 0 | | 115 | 7.51 | 3 | | 0 | | 2 | | 3 | |
|---|
| ElectronicFunctionality | 136 | 6.42 |
15 | 6.07 | 0 | | 0 | | 108 | 6.54 | 3 | | 0 | | 2 | | 3 | |
|---|
| SatisfactionCustomerSupport | 144 | 7.76 |
15 | 7.53 | 0 | | 0 | | 117 | 7.75 | 3 | | 0 | | 2 | | 3 | |
|---|
| CompanyLoyalty | 142 | 6.75 |
15 | 5.93 | 0 | | 0 | | 114 | 6.96 | 3 | | 0 | | 2 | | 3 | |
|---|
| 2018 Survey Results |
| Product: VERSO |
Response Distribution |
Statistics |
|---|
| Category | Responses |
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
Mode | Mean | Median |
|---|
| ILS Satisfaction | 145 |
| 1 | 1 | 4 | 4 | 9 | 12 | 36 | 49 | 29 | 8 | 7.26 | 8 |
|---|
| ILS Functionality | 145 |
| 2 | | 3 | 4 | 6 | 15 | 36 | 51 | 28 | 8 | 7.30 | 8 |
|---|
| Print Functionality | 143 |
| | 1 | 1 | 4 | 8 | 11 | 37 | 51 | 30 | 8 | 7.44 | 8 |
|---|
| Electronic Functionality | 136 |
7 | | 2 | 7 | 6 | 15 | 16 | 25 | 44 | 14 | 8 | 6.42 | 7 |
|---|
| Company Satisfaction | 144 |
1 | 2 | 1 | 3 | 3 | 7 | 9 | 28 | 52 | 38 | 8 | 7.42 | 8 |
|---|
| Support Satisfaction | 144 |
1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 10 | 19 | 49 | 56 | 9 | 7.76 | 8 |
|---|
| Support Improvement | 137 |
1 | 1 | 1 | | 5 | 30 | 8 | 29 | 31 | 31 | 8 | 6.94 | 7 |
|---|
| Company Loyalty | 142 |
4 | 4 | 4 | 3 | 8 | 12 | 10 | 28 | 31 | 38 | 9 | 6.75 | 7 |
|---|
| Open Source Interest | 143 |
48 | 15 | 10 | 11 | 20 | 24 | 6 | 3 | 5 | 1 | 0 | 2.62 | 2 |
|---|
| Category | Total | Yes | percent |
|---|
| Considering new ILS | 148 |
8 | 5.41% |
|---|
| Considering new Interface | 148 |
5 | 3.38% |
|---|
| System Installed on time? | 148 |
137 | 92.57% |
|---|
| Average Collection size: |
| 35763 |
|---|
| Type | Count |
|---|
| Public | 124 |
|---|
| Academic | 15 |
|---|
| School | 2 |
|---|
| Consortium | 3 |
|---|
| Special | 1 |
|---|
| Size Category | Count |
|---|
| [1] Under 10,000 | 18 |
|---|
| [2] 10,001-100,000 | 117 |
|---|
| [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 |
|---|
| 2017 Survey Results |
| Product: VERSO |
Response Distribution |
Statistics |
|---|
| Category | Responses |
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
Mode | Mean | Median |
|---|
| ILS Satisfaction | 132 |
1 | | 2 | 4 | 4 | 5 | 21 | 23 | 45 | 27 | 8 | 7.17 | 8 |
|---|
| ILS Functionality | 132 |
| | 4 | 4 | 4 | 9 | 20 | 24 | 43 | 24 | 8 | 7.04 | 8 |
|---|
| Print Functionality | 127 |
| 1 | 2 | 1 | 5 | 8 | 14 | 24 | 49 | 23 | 8 | 7.24 | 8 |
|---|
| Electronic Functionality | 127 |
2 | 1 | 2 | 4 | 14 | 18 | 17 | 15 | 35 | 19 | 8 | 6.46 | 7 |
|---|
| Company Satisfaction | 130 |
2 | 1 | 2 | | 3 | 8 | 9 | 27 | 37 | 41 | 9 | 7.42 | 8 |
|---|
| Support Satisfaction | 132 |
1 | | 1 | | 4 | 5 | 11 | 21 | 37 | 52 | 9 | 7.73 | 8 |
|---|
| Support Improvement | 128 |
2 | | | | 4 | 24 | 11 | 14 | 31 | 42 | 9 | 7.23 | 8 |
|---|
| Company Loyalty | 126 |
3 | | 1 | 2 | 7 | 7 | 17 | 21 | 33 | 35 | 9 | 7.13 | 8 |
|---|
| Open Source Interest | 127 |
48 | 13 | 14 | 8 | 15 | 14 | 7 | 4 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 2.35 | 2 |
|---|
| Category | Total | Yes | percent |
|---|
| Considering new ILS | 133 |
12 | 9.02% |
|---|
| Considering new Interface | 133 |
2 | 1.50% |
|---|
| System Installed on time? | 133 |
121 | 90.98% |
|---|
| Average Collection size: |
| 58743 |
|---|
| Type | Count |
|---|
| Public | 111 |
|---|
| Academic | 14 |
|---|
| School | 0 |
|---|
| Consortium | 4 |
|---|
| Special | 2 |
|---|
| Size Category | Count |
|---|
| [1] Under 10,000 | 18 |
|---|
| [2] 10,001-100,000 | 100 |
|---|
| [3] 100,001-250,000 | 7 |
|---|
| [4] 250,001-1,000,000 | 3 |
|---|
| [5] 1,000,001-10,000,000 | 1 |
|---|
| [6] over 10,000,001 | 0 |
|---|
| 2016 Survey Results |
| Product: VERSO |
Response Distribution |
Statistics |
|---|
| Category | Responses |
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
Mode | Mean | Median |
|---|
| ILS Satisfaction | 89 |
| | 3 | 2 | 3 | 8 | 10 | 27 | 25 | 11 | 7 | 6.88 | 7 |
|---|
| ILS Functionality | 88 |
| | 1 | 3 | 4 | 10 | 12 | 15 | 35 | 8 | 8 | 6.89 | 7 |
|---|
| Print Functionality | 87 |
1 | | 1 | 2 | 3 | 6 | 11 | 25 | 25 | 13 | 7 | 6.99 | 7 |
|---|
| Electronic Functionality | 75 |
3 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 6 | 8 | 9 | 18 | 14 | 10 | 7 | 6.15 | 7 |
|---|
| Company Satisfaction | 88 |
| | 1 | 2 | 4 | 5 | 10 | 13 | 37 | 16 | 8 | 7.27 | 8 |
|---|
| Support Satisfaction | 87 |
| 1 | | 1 | | 6 | 8 | 13 | 32 | 26 | 8 | 7.62 | 8 |
|---|
| Support Improvement | 86 |
| | 1 | | 7 | 12 | 11 | 24 | 15 | 16 | 7 | 6.84 | 7 |
|---|
| Company Loyalty | 88 |
4 | 2 | | | 4 | 8 | 9 | 17 | 28 | 16 | 8 | 6.81 | 8 |
|---|
| Open Source Interest | 85 |
24 | 10 | 22 | 6 | 6 | 7 | 5 | 3 | 2 | | 0 | 2.33 | 2 |
|---|
| Category | Total | Yes | percent |
|---|
| Considering new ILS | 90 |
4 | 4.44% |
|---|
| Considering new Interface | 90 |
2 | 2.22% |
|---|
| System Installed on time? | 90 |
83 | 92.22% |
|---|
| Average Collection size: |
| 39853 |
|---|
| Type | Count |
|---|
| Public | 77 |
|---|
| Academic | 11 |
|---|
| School | 0 |
|---|
| Consortium | 1 |
|---|
| Special | 0 |
|---|
| Size Category | Count |
|---|
| [1] Under 10,000 | 14 |
|---|
| [2] 10,001-100,000 | 69 |
|---|
| [3] 100,001-250,000 | 4 |
|---|
| [4] 250,001-1,000,000 | 1 |
|---|
| [5] 1,000,001-10,000,000 | 0 |
|---|
| [6] over 10,000,001 | 0 |
|---|
| 2015 Survey Results |
| Product: VERSO |
Response Distribution |
Statistics |
|---|
| Category | Responses |
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
Mode | Mean | Median |
|---|
| ILS Satisfaction | 131 |
| | 2 | 2 | 6 | 15 | 15 | 37 | 36 | 18 | 7 | 6.93 | 7 |
|---|
| ILS Functionality | 130 |
| | 2 | 2 | 7 | 13 | 16 | 45 | 32 | 13 | 7 | 6.82 | 7 |
|---|
| Print Functionality | 128 |
1 | | 1 | 1 | 8 | 2 | 15 | 42 | 43 | 15 | 8 | 7.11 | 7 |
|---|
| Electronic Functionality | 108 |
1 | 1 | 3 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 14 | 32 | 25 | 11 | 7 | 6.48 | 7 |
|---|
| Company Satisfaction | 130 |
1 | 1 | | 2 | 2 | 11 | 10 | 39 | 41 | 23 | 8 | 7.22 | 7 |
|---|
| Support Satisfaction | 130 |
| 1 | | 2 | 4 | 3 | 12 | 28 | 40 | 40 | 8 | 7.58 | 8 |
|---|
| Support Improvement | 125 |
| 1 | | | 7 | 35 | 10 | 18 | 30 | 24 | 5 | 6.77 | 7 |
|---|
| Company Loyalty | 127 |
6 | | | 3 | 8 | 15 | 20 | 25 | 28 | 22 | 8 | 6.56 | 7 |
|---|
| Open Source Interest | 122 |
36 | 9 | 24 | 6 | 16 | 15 | 5 | 6 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 2.68 | 2 |
|---|
| Category | Total | Yes | percent |
|---|
| Considering new ILS | 136 |
12 | 8.82% |
|---|
| Considering new Interface | 136 |
3 | 2.21% |
|---|
| System Installed on time? | 136 |
125 | 91.91% |
|---|
| Average Collection size: |
| 38377 |
|---|
| Type | Count |
|---|
| Public | 119 |
|---|
| Academic | 12 |
|---|
| School | 0 |
|---|
| Consortium | 2 |
|---|
| Special | 1 |
|---|
| Size Category | Count |
|---|
| [1] Under 10,000 | 17 |
|---|
| [2] 10,001-100,000 | 106 |
|---|
| [3] 100,001-250,000 | 8 |
|---|
| [4] 250,001-1,000,000 | 1 |
|---|
| [5] 1,000,001-10,000,000 | 0 |
|---|
| [6] over 10,000,001 | 0 |
|---|
| 2014 Survey Results |
| Product: VERSO |
Response Distribution |
Statistics |
|---|
| Category | Responses |
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
Mode | Mean | Median |
|---|
| ILS Satisfaction | 53 |
2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | | 7 | 8 | 11 | 11 | 8 | 7 | 6.26 | 7 |
|---|
| ILS Functionality | 54 |
| 1 | 4 | 2 | 1 | 5 | 6 | 9 | 19 | 7 | 8 | 6.63 | 7 |
|---|
| Print Functionality | 55 |
| 1 | 1 | 2 | 6 | 4 | 6 | 18 | 12 | 5 | 7 | 6.47 | 7 |
|---|
| Electronic Functionality | 47 |
3 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 7 | 9 | 4 | 10 | 5 | 4 | 7 | 5.38 | 5 |
|---|
| Company Satisfaction | 54 |
| 2 | 3 | | 2 | 3 | 9 | 18 | 10 | 7 | 7 | 6.56 | 7 |
|---|
| Support Satisfaction | 55 |
1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 4 | 10 | 21 | 11 | 8 | 7.04 | 8 |
|---|
| Support Improvement | 53 |
| 3 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 11 | 1 | 8 | 18 | 7 | 8 | 6.45 | 7 |
|---|
| Company Loyalty | 54 |
4 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 9 | 2 | 17 | 12 | 8 | 6.39 | 8 |
|---|
| Open Source Interest | 52 |
14 | 6 | 12 | 1 | 9 | 5 | 3 | | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2.48 | 2 |
|---|
| Category | Total | Yes | percent |
|---|
| Considering new ILS | 58 |
8 | 13.79% |
|---|
| Considering new Interface | 58 |
4 | 6.90% |
|---|
| System Installed on time? | 58 |
55 | 94.83% |
|---|
| Average Collection size: |
| 47480 |
|---|
| Type | Count |
|---|
| Public | 49 |
|---|
| Academic | 7 |
|---|
| School | 0 |
|---|
| Consortium | 1 |
|---|
| Special | 0 |
|---|
| Size Category | Count |
|---|
| [1] Under 10,000 | 8 |
|---|
| [2] 10,001-100,000 | 42 |
|---|
| [3] 100,001-250,000 | 6 |
|---|
| [4] 250,001-1,000,000 | 1 |
|---|
| [5] 1,000,001-10,000,000 | 0 |
|---|
| [6] over 10,000,001 | 0 |
|---|
| 2013 Survey Results |
| Product: VERSO |
Response Distribution |
Statistics |
|---|
| Category | Responses |
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
Mode | Mean | Median |
|---|
| ILS Satisfaction | 68 |
5 | 2 | | | 2 | 6 | 4 | 18 | 19 | 12 | 8 | 6.62 | 7 |
|---|
| ILS Functionality | 68 |
3 | 1 | | 1 | 5 | 6 | 4 | 19 | 18 | 11 | 7 | 6.68 | 7 |
|---|
| Print Functionality | 68 |
4 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 6 | 14 | 22 | 15 | 8 | 6.85 | 8 |
|---|
| Electronic Functionality | 63 |
3 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 6 | 7 | 6 | 13 | 11 | 10 | 7 | 6.02 | 7 |
|---|
| Company Satisfaction | 68 |
5 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 4 | 3 | 16 | 15 | 21 | 9 | 6.90 | 8 |
|---|
| Support Satisfaction | 68 |
4 | | 1 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 11 | 17 | 26 | 9 | 7.19 | 8 |
|---|
| Support Improvement | 64 |
4 | | | | 7 | 18 | 2 | 11 | 8 | 14 | 5 | 6.20 | 7 |
|---|
| Company Loyalty | 67 |
5 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 4 | 4 | 5 | 12 | 12 | 18 | 9 | 6.28 | 7 |
|---|
| Open Source Interest | 66 |
24 | 11 | 5 | 1 | 7 | 10 | 3 | 4 | | 1 | 0 | 2.38 | 1 |
|---|
| Category | Total | Yes | percent |
|---|
| Considering new ILS | 69 |
7 | 10.14% |
|---|
| Considering new Interface | 69 |
2 | 2.90% |
|---|
| System Installed on time? | 69 |
66 | 95.65% |
|---|
| Average Collection size: |
| 42434 |
|---|
| Type | Count |
|---|
| Public | 58 |
|---|
| Academic | 8 |
|---|
| School | 1 |
|---|
| Consortium | 0 |
|---|
| Special | 1 |
|---|
| Size Category | Count |
|---|
| [1] Under 10,000 | 4 |
|---|
| [2] 10,001-100,000 | 57 |
|---|
| [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 |
|---|
| 2012 Survey Results |
| Product: VERSO |
Response Distribution |
Statistics |
|---|
| Category | Responses |
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
Mode | Mean | Median |
|---|
| ILS Satisfaction | 74 |
2 | 1 | | 3 | | 1 | 5 | 15 | 31 | 16 | 8 | 7.32 | 8 |
|---|
| ILS Functionality | 76 |
2 | | 3 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 4 | 18 | 29 | 14 | 8 | 7.05 | 8 |
|---|
| Print Functionality | 0 |
| | | | | | | | | | 0 | 0.00 | |
|---|
| Electronic Functionality | 0 |
| | | | | | | | | | 0 | 0.00 | |
|---|
| Company Satisfaction | 76 |
1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | | 1 | 4 | 15 | 24 | 28 | 9 | 7.68 | 8 |
|---|
| Support Satisfaction | 76 |
1 | 1 | | 3 | | 1 | 4 | 11 | 18 | 37 | 9 | 7.80 | 8 |
|---|
| Support Improvement | 75 |
1 | | 1 | 2 | 9 | 14 | 3 | 7 | 16 | 22 | 9 | 6.76 | 8 |
|---|
| Company Loyalty | 76 |
5 | | 1 | 1 | 2 | 4 | 4 | 8 | 22 | 29 | 9 | 7.24 | 8 |
|---|
| Open Source Interest | 70 |
22 | 8 | 14 | 4 | 7 | 7 | 5 | 3 | | | 0 | 2.31 | 2 |
|---|
| Category | Total | Yes | percent |
|---|
| Considering new ILS | 79 |
6 | 7.59% |
|---|
| Considering new Interface | 79 |
3 | 3.80% |
|---|
| System Installed on time? | 79 |
71 | 89.87% |
|---|
| Average Collection size: |
| 64695 |
|---|
| Type | Count |
|---|
| Public | 61 |
|---|
| Academic | 14 |
|---|
| School | 1 |
|---|
| Consortium | 1 |
|---|
| Special | 1 |
|---|
| Size Category | Count |
|---|
| [1] Under 10,000 | 9 |
|---|
| [2] 10,001-100,000 | 63 |
|---|
| [3] 100,001-250,000 | 3 |
|---|
| [4] 250,001-1,000,000 | 1 |
|---|
| [5] 1,000,001-10,000,000 | 1 |
|---|
| [6] over 10,000,001 | 0 |
|---|
| 2011 Survey Results |
| Product: VERSO |
Response Distribution |
Statistics |
|---|
| Category | Responses |
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
Mode | Mean | Median |
|---|
| ILS Satisfaction | 67 |
| 1 | 1 | | | 2 | 6 | 12 | 21 | 24 | 9 | 7.72 | 8 |
|---|
| ILS Functionality | 67 |
| | 2 | | | 3 | 7 | 16 | 22 | 17 | 8 | 7.49 | 8 |
|---|
| Print Functionality | 0 |
| | | | | | | | | | 0 | 0.00 | |
|---|
| Electronic Functionality | 0 |
| | | | | | | | | | 0 | 0.00 | |
|---|
| Company Satisfaction | 67 |
| | | 1 | | 1 | 7 | 5 | 23 | 30 | 9 | 8.04 | 8 |
|---|
| Support Satisfaction | 67 |
| 1 | | | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 19 | 42 | 9 | 8.34 | 9 |
|---|
| Support Improvement | 66 |
1 | | | | 1 | 9 | 8 | 5 | 13 | 29 | 9 | 7.53 | 8 |
|---|
| Company Loyalty | 66 |
2 | 1 | | | 1 | 3 | 3 | 8 | 18 | 30 | 9 | 7.70 | 8 |
|---|
| Open Source Interest | 66 |
18 | 12 | 7 | 4 | 9 | 8 | 4 | | 3 | 1 | 0 | 2.59 | 2 |
|---|
| Category | Total | Yes | percent |
|---|
| Considering new ILS | 67 |
3 | 4.48% |
|---|
| Considering new Interface | 67 |
0 | 0.00% |
|---|
| System Installed on time? | 67 |
65 | 97.01% |
|---|
| Average Collection size: |
| 40971 |
|---|
| Type | Count |
|---|
| Public | 50 |
|---|
| Academic | 13 |
|---|
| School | 2 |
|---|
| Consortium | 0 |
|---|
| Special | 1 |
|---|
| Size Category | Count |
|---|
| [1] Under 10,000 | 6 |
|---|
| [2] 10,001-100,000 | 56 |
|---|
| [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 |
|---|
| 2010 Survey Results |
| Product: VERSO |
Response Distribution |
Statistics |
|---|
| Category | Responses |
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
Mode | Mean | Median |
|---|
| ILS Satisfaction | 72 |
| | | 1 | 1 | 3 | 7 | 27 | 17 | 16 | 7 | 7.40 | 7 |
|---|
| ILS Functionality | 0 |
| | | | | | | | | | 0 | 0.00 | |
|---|
| Print Functionality | 0 |
| | | | | | | | | | 0 | 0.00 | |
|---|
| Electronic Functionality | 0 |
| | | | | | | | | | 0 | 0.00 | |
|---|
| Company Satisfaction | 72 |
| | | | | 5 | 4 | 19 | 16 | 28 | 9 | 7.81 | 8 |
|---|
| Support Satisfaction | 72 |
| | | 1 | | 2 | 3 | 19 | 12 | 35 | 9 | 7.99 | 8 |
|---|
| Support Improvement | 71 |
| | | | 16 | 15 | 4 | 5 | 8 | 23 | 9 | 6.61 | 7 |
|---|
| Company Loyalty | 72 |
| | | | 3 | 5 | 2 | 5 | 24 | 33 | 9 | 7.96 | 8 |
|---|
| Open Source Interest | 71 |
20 | 7 | 20 | 6 | 2 | 11 | 4 | 1 | | | 0 | 2.24 | 2 |
|---|
| Category | Total | Yes | percent |
|---|
| Considering new ILS | 73 |
4 | 5.48% |
|---|
| Considering new Interface | 73 |
0 | 0.00% |
|---|
| System Installed on time? | 73 |
71 | 97.26% |
|---|
| Average Collection size: |
| 31725 |
|---|
| Type | Count |
|---|
| Public | 59 |
|---|
| Academic | 11 |
|---|
| School | 1 |
|---|
| Consortium | 0 |
|---|
| Special | 1 |
|---|
| Size Category | Count |
|---|
| [1] Under 10,000 | 6 |
|---|
| [2] 10,001-100,000 | 59 |
|---|
| [3] 100,001-250,000 | 2 |
|---|
| [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: VERSO |
Response Distribution |
Statistics |
|---|
| Category | Responses |
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
Mode | Mean | Median |
|---|
| ILS Satisfaction | 71 |
| | | | 1 | 1 | 5 | 16 | 27 | 21 | 8 | 7.83 | 8 |
|---|
| ILS Functionality | 0 |
| | | | | | | | | | 0 | 0.00 | |
|---|
| Print Functionality | 0 |
| | | | | | | | | | 0 | 0.00 | |
|---|
| Electronic Functionality | 0 |
| | | | | | | | | | 0 | 0.00 | |
|---|
| Company Satisfaction | 71 |
| | | 1 | | 2 | 2 | 5 | 19 | 42 | 9 | 8.31 | 9 |
|---|
| Support Satisfaction | 70 |
| | | 1 | 1 | 1 | | 8 | 15 | 44 | 9 | 8.34 | 9 |
|---|
| Support Improvement | 64 |
| 2 | | | | 7 | 2 | 10 | 10 | 33 | 9 | 7.75 | 9 |
|---|
| Company Loyalty | 71 |
| | | | 1 | 1 | 1 | 9 | 9 | 50 | 9 | 8.45 | 9 |
|---|
| Open Source Interest | 71 |
29 | 9 | 12 | 1 | 5 | 8 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2.06 | 1 |
|---|
| Category | Total | Yes | percent |
|---|
| Considering new ILS | 72 |
1 | 1.39% |
|---|
| Considering new Interface | 72 |
1 | 1.39% |
|---|
| System Installed on time? | 72 |
68 | 94.44% |
|---|
| 2008 Survey Results |
| Product: VERSO |
Response Distribution |
Statistics |
|---|
| Category | Responses |
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
Mode | Mean | Median |
|---|
| ILS Satisfaction | 81 |
2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 2 | 17 | 25 | 24 | 8 | 7.26 | 8 |
|---|
| ILS Functionality | 0 |
| | | | | | | | | | 0 | 0.00 | |
|---|
| Print Functionality | 0 |
| | | | | | | | | | 0 | 0.00 | |
|---|
| Electronic Functionality | 0 |
| | | | | | | | | | 0 | 0.00 | |
|---|
| Company Satisfaction | 81 |
2 | | | 2 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 12 | 20 | 37 | 9 | 7.68 | 8 |
|---|
| Support Satisfaction | 81 |
2 | | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 11 | 15 | 44 | 9 | 7.81 | 9 |
|---|
| Support Improvement | 0 |
not applicable |
|---|
| Company Loyalty | 81 |
3 | | 2 | | 4 | 3 | | 10 | 18 | 41 | 9 | 7.63 | 9 |
|---|
| Open Source Interest | 81 |
30 | 6 | 6 | 8 | 8 | 11 | 5 | 4 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 2.63 | 2 |
|---|
| Category | Total | Yes | percent |
|---|
| Considering new ILS | 83 |
4 | 4.82% |
|---|
| Considering new Interface | 83 |
0 | 0.00% |
|---|
| System Installed on time? | 83 |
80 | 96.39% |
|---|
| 2007 Survey Results |
| Product: VERSO |
Response Distribution |
Statistics |
|---|
| Category | Responses |
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
Mode | Mean | Median |
|---|
| ILS Satisfaction | 18 |
1 | | | | | 2 | 2 | 5 | 5 | 3 | 7 | 6.89 | 7 |
|---|
| ILS Functionality | 0 |
| | | | | | | | | | 0 | 0.00 | |
|---|
| Print Functionality | 0 |
| | | | | | | | | | 0 | 0.00 | |
|---|
| Electronic Functionality | 0 |
| | | | | | | | | | 0 | 0.00 | |
|---|
| Company Satisfaction | 24 |
| | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | | 5 | 8 | 7 | 8 | 7.33 | 8 |
|---|
| Support Satisfaction | 24 |
| | 1 | 1 | 1 | | 1 | 4 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 7.46 | 8 |
|---|
| Support Improvement | 0 |
not applicable |
|---|
| Company Loyalty | 24 |
3 | | 2 | | | | 1 | 3 | 8 | 7 | 8 | 6.58 | 8 |
|---|
| Open Source Interest | 24 |
7 | 2 | 1 | 3 | 3 | 4 | 2 | | 1 | 1 | 0 | 3.08 | 3 |
|---|
| Category | Total | Yes | percent |
|---|
| Considering new ILS | 24 |
4 | 16.67% |
|---|
| Considering new Interface | 24 |
1 | 4.17% |
|---|
| System Installed on time? | 24 |
1 | 4.17% |
|---|
2019 : gen: 6.29 company 6.94 loyalty 6.32 support 7.50
2018 : gen: 7.26 company 7.42 loyalty 6.75 support 7.76
2017 : gen: 7.17 company 7.42 loyalty 7.13 support 7.73
2016 : gen: 6.88 company 7.27 loyalty 6.81 support 7.62
2015 : gen: 6.93 company 7.22 loyalty 6.56 support 7.58
2014 : gen: 6.26 company 6.56 loyalty 6.39 support 7.04
2013 : gen: 6.62 company 6.90 loyalty 6.28 support 7.19
2012 : gen: 7.32 company 7.68 loyalty 7.24 support 7.80
2011 : gen: 7.72 company 8.04 loyalty 7.70 support 8.34
2010 : gen: 7.40 company 7.81 loyalty 7.96 support 7.99
2009 : gen: 7.83 company 8.31 loyalty 8.45 support 8.34
2008 : gen: 7.26 company 7.68 loyalty 7.63 support 7.81
2007 : gen: 6.89 company 7.33 loyalty 6.58 support 7.46
Comments (survey2018)
In the past I have had many issues with this ILS provided, over time they have addressed and resolved these issues. They have improved and continue to improve. They respond respectfully to problems or concerns. They implement changes and they are quick to be responsive. We have almost no down time. For me they have gone from my looking for a new vender to being a vender I'd recommend. That I think is commendable.
(Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 8)
We are very satisfied with our current ILS. We migrated 10 years ago to Auto-Graphics and they've released a major update about every second year. They are responsive to library needs, aware of patron needs, and seem to maintain high security practices. No complaints about their product or support, nor are we actively looking for an alternative provider.
(Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 8)
AutoGraphics has excellent front-line help. Everyone we work with in that role responds in short order, knows the product, and is willing to find solutions.
(Library type: State; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 5)
Auto-Graphics has been pretty reliable, but the system feels old and clunky. There are too many steps to complete simple tasks.
We've had major projects in our library that have prevented pursuing a different ILS, but it is on our radar for 2019 to investigate options.
(Library type: Academic; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 6)
Agent/Verso no longer provides federated searching of the databases. That is what it was purchased to do. Now each database has to be opened individually because of encrypted logins.
(Library type: Academic; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 5)
NCIP is a separate charge from our ILS. I would really like to take advantage of that for our interloans, but not for an additional cost. Also, whatever allows Unique Management to access our records for collection purposes (the most economical way to do it from them) is an additional large charge from Auto-Graphics. If we could afford that module, we wouldn't have to be concerned about people who do not return things! BOTH of these things are as vital as any other part of the system, so I do not understand, nor agree, with them being an addtional charge. Large charge!!
(Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)
While customer service for AutoGraphics has been and continues to be excellent, there are still a lot of functionality issues that are unresolved meaning that functionality, especially in the search and statistics areas, still lags behind our needs.
(Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 4)
This is the only system I have ever worked with , so I really can't compare them to another. I do know that we rarely have a problem.
(Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 8)
I rated digital resources low on the survey because we do not add digital resources to our agent-verso catalog for customers. Too cumbersome to keep track of what it owned and deleted by that source.
(Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)
Options and changes are sometimes difficult to implement. The payment/fine system is TERRIBLE. It is hard to read information, and somethings we are unable to do as other systems can do.
(Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 7)
Just started my position 5 months ago. Some of these questions I answered to the best of my knowledge
(Library type: Public; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 5)
We use Verso,
they are awesome, and extremely timely and helpful
(Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 9)
Sorry, guess I am technology vocabulary challenged. Many of the terms are above my level of technology vocabulary knowledge. I think the improvements in printing...especially the barcode printing...has been super for our library.
(Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 7)
Some of the features in this ILS are frustrating. I search for an item and forget I'm not logged in and when I do log in it makes me start my search all over. uh. fix this.
Expired patrons-It wont let you select the same date a year later. I have to select the 14th of August and save and then go back in and select 15th of August. fix this.
(Library type: Academic; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 7)
I have worked here less than one year so the majority of your questions I have no answer for in which case I put a zero or a no.
(Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 6)
The AG crew is outstanding. We just do not believe we are getting all the functionality the we would like out of our ILS. After a rocky start they have corrected many of the issues that we had in our floating collection system. The customer service has been professional and responsive.
(Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 3)
It's very difficult to get necessary software changes implemented. Inventory in particular is buggy and they haven't responded to our requests for changes. Customer Support is excellent but this does not extend to the developers.
(Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 4)
Auto-Graphics was quite helpful when we needed help in deleting a large collection.
(Library type: Consortium; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 7)
Extremely dissatisfied with the company's decision to not support the app in the roll out of it's new version. Resources, including time and money, were spent by the library to market the app to have it quickly shut down.
(Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 6)
I appreciate the customer service at Auto-Graphics. The majority of the time I call, I get an actual person which is amazing! Everyone that I've spoken with is friendly and polite. Suggestions for improvements are taken in, weighed, and often implemented, which again, is amazing! Thank you for providing excellent customer service!
(Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 8)
For a library of our size and the fact when a new library director comes in and gets very little training, if any at all, it is very user friendly and one is able to find out how to use this software without to much difficulty...
(Library type: Public; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 9)
Our largest problem has been that the ILS is through a statewide consortium, but our library does not function as a branch, it is independent of the other libraries in the system. However, when cataloging items, records are sometimes shared. This makes it impossible to edit the item, because as soon as the MARC record is shared between libraries neither has the ability to edit the MARC. This also can cause problems when deleting items, if we delete an item but another library is using that MARC record, the item will show up in our search results as 0 of 0 availability, confusing patrons.
Additionally, the AgCat program is a bit old and clunky, making it hard to do original cataloging edits. I am not sure why it is a separate program from the web interface of Verso?
(Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 6)
We have been very happy with the product we use and wish the State of Ct had continued using this vendor for their Interlibrary Loan.
(Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)
We are a very poor library, we do not have extra money for our ILS
(Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)
We are not currently using Verso's servers. As a result, we are about five updates behind. At the end of January, we will move to their servers and perform an update. I will be able to evaluate their performance more effectively after this move has been made. Currently, they are very helpful in getting ready for the move.
(Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 8)
Verso has been awesome at responding when we have hit a wall as to how much we know about the features of Verso and they take the time to walk us through the steps, and then check back later to make sure we don't have more questions! Great service!
(Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 7)
Verso is a great product for us. However,the loss of integration with the statewide system is problematical. Also, we are unhappy that Auto-Graphics has chosen to discontinue its mobile app.
(Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 8)
The Dashboard is very hard to navigate.
(Library type: Academic; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 6)