Library Technology Guides

Documents, Databases, News, and Commentary

Select another Product Report:

Statistical Report for Voyager

2020 Survey Results
Product: Voyager		Response Distribution										Statistics
Category	Responses	0	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	Mode	Mean	Median
ILS Satisfaction	22				2	1	8	2	8	1		5	5.73	6
ILS Functionality	22			1	2	5	4	4	5	1		4	5.23	5
Print Functionality	22			1			2	1	10	6	2	7	7.00	7
Electronic Functionality	21	1	4	3	1	1	5	6				6	3.71	5
Company Satisfaction	22				2	1	2	2	6	8	1	8	6.68	7
Support Satisfaction	22				2	2	1	1	5	6	5	8	6.95	8
Support Improvement	0											0	0.00
Company Loyalty	21			1	1	2	2	1	5	1	8	9	6.86	7
Open Source Interest	20	3		2	2		2	2		2	2	0	5.80	3

Category	Total	Yes	percent
Considering new ILS	22	19	86.36%
Considering new Interface	22	4	18.18%
System Installed on time?	22	0	0.00%

Average Collection size:		12049619

Type	Count
Public	0
Academic	3
School	0
Consortium	0
Special	0

Size Category	Count
[1] Under 10,000	0
[2] 10,001-100,000	3
[3] 100,001-250,000	5
[4] 250,001-1,000,000	4
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,000	6
[6] over 10,000,001	4

2019 Survey Results
Product: Voyager		Response Distribution										Statistics
Category	Responses	0	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	Mode	Mean	Median
ILS Satisfaction	51			1	6	6	13	8	10	7		5	5.55	5
ILS Functionality	51		1	2	7	7	9	10	8	6	1	6	5.33	5
Print Functionality	51					2	2	12	15	17	3	8	7.02	7
Electronic Functionality	50	2	8	10	9	5	7	4	2	2	1	2	3.46	3
Company Satisfaction	50			1	3	4	7	13	11	10	1	6	6.12	6
Support Satisfaction	51			1	1	4	7	8	10	16	4	8	6.63	7
Support Improvement	50	2			2	7	19	10	3	6	1	5	5.34	5
Company Loyalty	51			3	1	5	4	7	5	10	16	9	6.86	8
Open Source Interest	48	13	3	5	5	3	3	8	2	1	5	0	3.54	3

Category	Total	Yes	percent
Considering new ILS	51	42	82.35%
Considering new Interface	51	9	17.65%
System Installed on time?	51	47	92.16%

Average Collection size:		5433015

Type	Count
Public	0
Academic	37
School	0
Consortium	1
Special	2

Size Category	Count
[1] Under 10,000	2
[2] 10,001-100,000	11
[3] 100,001-250,000	11
[4] 250,001-1,000,000	12
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,000	11
[6] over 10,000,001	4

Statistics according to type and size categories

The following table presents the 2018 results according to the type and size of the library.

Voyager	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	71	5.27	22	4.86	15	5.87	20	5.15	0		0		0		0		1
ILSFunctionality	71	4.99	22	4.77	15	5.67	20	4.70	0		0		0		0		1
PrintFunctionality	71	6.58	22	6.23	15	7.07	20	6.85	0		0		0		0		1
ElectronicFunctionality	70	3.74	21	3.10	15	4.80	20	3.35	0		0		0		0		1
SatisfactionCustomerSupport	68	6.40	21	5.95	15	6.53	18	6.33	0		0		0		0		1
CompanyLoyalty	68	6.53	21	6.29	15	6.33	19	6.95	0		0		0		0		0

2018 Survey Results
Product: Voyager		Response Distribution										Statistics
Category	Responses	0	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	Mode	Mean	Median
ILS Satisfaction	71	1	1	4	7	6	15	21	11	3	2	6	5.27	6
ILS Functionality	71	1		3	14	10	13	17	8	2	3	6	4.99	5
Print Functionality	71	1			2	6	4	18	17	17	6	6	6.58	7
Electronic Functionality	70	4	11	5	11	14	9	9	5		2	4	3.74	4
Company Satisfaction	70	1		2	1	6	8	17	16	16	3	6	6.29	7
Support Satisfaction	68	1		2	3	3	6	14	19	17	3	7	6.40	7
Support Improvement	70	1			1	17	20	10	8	11	2	5	5.61	5
Company Loyalty	68	4	2	1	2	4	6	7	7	18	17	8	6.53	8
Open Source Interest	68	20	7	7	4	7	8	3	4	1	7	0	3.21	3

Category	Total	Yes	percent
Considering new ILS	71	58	81.69%
Considering new Interface	71	18	25.35%
System Installed on time?	71	60	84.51%

Average Collection size:		4703474

Type	Count
Public	0
Academic	57
School	0
Consortium	1
Special	0

Size Category	Count
[1] Under 10,000	1
[2] 10,001-100,000	12
[3] 100,001-250,000	12
[4] 250,001-1,000,000	20
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,000	20
[6] over 10,000,001	5

2017 Survey Results
Product: Voyager		Response Distribution										Statistics
Category	Responses	0	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	Mode	Mean	Median
ILS Satisfaction	119		1	6	9	11	28	18	28	17	1	5	5.66	6
ILS Functionality	118		2	5	8	18	26	15	22	18	4	5	5.61	6
Print Functionality	116				3	3	9	17	41	36	7	7	6.95	7
Electronic Functionality	117	8	16	18	12	20	9	14	13	5	2	4	3.81	4
Company Satisfaction	119		1	3	1	16	14	25	29	26	4	7	6.23	6
Support Satisfaction	118		2	2	4	10	17	26	27	23	7	7	6.23	6
Support Improvement	117	1		1	5	13	57	10	12	13	5	5	5.53	5
Company Loyalty	118	3	1	3	3	11	13	17	16	23	28	9	6.57	7
Open Source Interest	117	20	15	18	7	15	9	9	10	10	4	0	3.56	3

Category	Total	Yes	percent
Considering new ILS	119	83	69.75%
Considering new Interface	119	15	12.61%
System Installed on time?	119	113	94.96%

Average Collection size:		2797448

Type	Count
Public	0
Academic	91
School	0
Consortium	2
Special	0

Size Category	Count
[1] Under 10,000	3
[2] 10,001-100,000	22
[3] 100,001-250,000	25
[4] 250,001-1,000,000	34
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,000	27
[6] over 10,000,001	6

2016 Survey Results
Product: Voyager		Response Distribution										Statistics
Category	Responses	0	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	Mode	Mean	Median
ILS Satisfaction	117	2	4	3	9	13	16	29	21	17	3	6	5.58	6
ILS Functionality	116	2	3	5	14	11	18	23	20	12	8	6	5.47	6
Print Functionality	117	1		3	3	6	7	19	31	31	16	7	6.81	7
Electronic Functionality	115	9	10	26	17	9	19	13	7	4	1	2	3.58	3
Company Satisfaction	115	1	3	7	6	6	17	16	28	27	4	7	5.98	7
Support Satisfaction	112	3	2	5	5	11	13	16	22	26	9	8	6.03	7
Support Improvement	112	2	1	1	9	22	48	7	8	9	5	5	5.12	5
Company Loyalty	116	2	2	2	5	12	14	13	30	11	25	7	6.38	7
Open Source Interest	117	26	13	10	7	14	17	7	11	6	6	0	3.56	4

Category	Total	Yes	percent
Considering new ILS	117	79	67.52%
Considering new Interface	117	18	15.38%
System Installed on time?	117	107	91.45%

Average Collection size:		3728028

Type	Count
Public	0
Academic	90
School	0
Consortium	4
Special	2

Size Category	Count
[1] Under 10,000	3
[2] 10,001-100,000	22
[3] 100,001-250,000	22
[4] 250,001-1,000,000	32
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,000	27
[6] over 10,000,001	8

2015 Survey Results
Product: Voyager		Response Distribution										Statistics
Category	Responses	0	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	Mode	Mean	Median
ILS Satisfaction	115	1	1	4	6	13	19	33	16	21	1	6	5.75	6
ILS Functionality	115		1	2	8	11	23	29	17	18	6	6	5.90	6
Print Functionality	113			1	4	7	8	19	25	32	17	8	6.90	7
Electronic Functionality	113	1	17	16	11	17	18	21	6	4	2	6	4.05	4
Company Satisfaction	113			3	7	12	21	21	22	19	8	7	6.05	6
Support Satisfaction	113	2		5	5	13	17	14	21	30	6	8	6.08	7
Support Improvement	111	1		2	4	13	53	14	16	4	4	5	5.38	5
Company Loyalty	115	5	2	3	5	4	16	19	22	17	22	7	6.27	7
Open Source Interest	109	24	11	10	12	7	13	6	10	10	6	0	3.67	3

Category	Total	Yes	percent
Considering new ILS	120	82	68.33%
Considering new Interface	120	17	14.17%
System Installed on time?	120	107	89.17%

Average Collection size:		2289918

Type	Count
Public	0
Academic	85
School	1
Consortium	1
Special	2

Size Category	Count
[1] Under 10,000	5
[2] 10,001-100,000	21
[3] 100,001-250,000	28
[4] 250,001-1,000,000	26
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,000	27
[6] over 10,000,001	7

2014 Survey Results
Product: Voyager		Response Distribution										Statistics
Category	Responses	0	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	Mode	Mean	Median
ILS Satisfaction	149	2	3	5	9	15	16	38	37	22	2	6	5.78	6
ILS Functionality	148		5	6	12	16	20	33	31	20	5	6	5.66	6
Print Functionality	148				4	3	8	25	39	56	13	8	7.11	7
Electronic Functionality	145	6	16	21	17	18	16	24	19	6	2	6	4.17	4
Company Satisfaction	147	2	1	3	12	11	27	23	38	24	6	7	5.93	6
Support Satisfaction	147	1	3	6	8	12	24	30	32	22	9	7	5.90	6
Support Improvement	146	1	2	6	5	22	65	18	11	8	8	5	5.23	5
Company Loyalty	149	10	5	9	5	11	26	12	26	27	18	8	5.66	6
Open Source Interest	145	35	26	14	7	15	18	12	9	3	6	0	3.02	2

Category	Total	Yes	percent
Considering new ILS	151	102	67.55%
Considering new Interface	151	26	17.22%
System Installed on time?	151	133	88.08%

Average Collection size:		1939716

Type	Count
Public	0
Academic	128
School	0
Consortium	1
Special	3

Size Category	Count
[1] Under 10,000	4
[2] 10,001-100,000	39
[3] 100,001-250,000	32
[4] 250,001-1,000,000	36
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,000	29
[6] over 10,000,001	5

2013 Survey Results
Product: Voyager		Response Distribution										Statistics
Category	Responses	0	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	Mode	Mean	Median
ILS Satisfaction	112	1	1	3	6	7	11	21	42	19	1	7	6.15	7
ILS Functionality	112		2	4	3	6	16	24	32	22	3	7	6.20	7
Print Functionality	112				2	4	4	12	31	43	16	8	7.31	8
Electronic Functionality	111	1	6	14	17	7	17	21	18	7	3	6	4.80	5
Company Satisfaction	110	1	2	3	7	7	11	21	42	14	2	7	6.02	7
Support Satisfaction	110		5	2	5	10	14	26	31	15	2	7	5.86	6
Support Improvement	109		2	1	8	7	56	10	12	9	4	5	5.39	5
Company Loyalty	110	2	1	2	8	5	15	23	24	17	13	7	6.21	6
Open Source Interest	110	27	12	13	6	9	15	12	9	4	3	0	3.28	3

Category	Total	Yes	percent
Considering new ILS	114	59	51.75%
Considering new Interface	114	30	26.32%
System Installed on time?	114	103	90.35%

Average Collection size:		1534747

Type	Count
Public	0
Academic	85
School	0
Consortium	1
Special	0

Size Category	Count
[1] Under 10,000	2
[2] 10,001-100,000	21
[3] 100,001-250,000	25
[4] 250,001-1,000,000	29
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,000	24
[6] over 10,000,001	3

2012 Survey Results
Product: Voyager		Response Distribution										Statistics
Category	Responses	0	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	Mode	Mean	Median
ILS Satisfaction	171	4	1	8	11	13	21	37	55	20	1	7	5.75	6
ILS Functionality	171	1	3	8	15	10	29	28	43	30	4	7	5.81	6
Print Functionality	0											0	0.00
Electronic Functionality	0											0	0.00
Company Satisfaction	169	3	3	6	11	16	22	29	54	25		7	5.76	6
Support Satisfaction	168	4	5	5	13	17	23	33	45	22	1	7	5.57	6
Support Improvement	162	8	5	1	4	28	65	15	24	10	2	5	5.01	5
Company Loyalty	170	7	3	6	12	12	33	20	38	14	25	7	5.81	6
Open Source Interest	167	32	17	19	16	9	32	16	12	5	9	0	3.59	3

Category	Total	Yes	percent
Considering new ILS	172	84	48.84%
Considering new Interface	172	56	32.56%
System Installed on time?	172	154	89.53%

Average Collection size:		1439754

Type	Count
Public	0
Academic	136
School	0
Consortium	1
Special	5

Size Category	Count
[1] Under 10,000	6
[2] 10,001-100,000	22
[3] 100,001-250,000	39
[4] 250,001-1,000,000	53
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,000	30
[6] over 10,000,001	4

2011 Survey Results
Product: Voyager		Response Distribution										Statistics
Category	Responses	0	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	Mode	Mean	Median
ILS Satisfaction	154	1		4	17	5	18	27	56	22	4	7	6.07	7
ILS Functionality	152		1	8	16	7	16	26	44	31	3	7	6.00	7
Print Functionality	0											0	0.00
Electronic Functionality	0											0	0.00
Company Satisfaction	154	1	1	4	10	12	16	22	54	27	7	7	6.21	7
Support Satisfaction	152	3		7	11	5	18	23	47	30	8	7	6.16	7
Support Improvement	149	2	2	4	7	13	62	16	19	15	9	5	5.52	5
Company Loyalty	154	5	2		12	10	30	17	34	24	20	7	6.10	7
Open Source Interest	152	25	16	16	16	12	21	17	13	10	6	0	3.79	4

Category	Total	Yes	percent
Considering new ILS	154	60	38.96%
Considering new Interface	154	62	40.26%
System Installed on time?	154	139	90.26%

Average Collection size:		1940682

Type	Count
Public	0
Academic	117
School	0
Consortium	2
Special	4

Size Category	Count
[1] Under 10,000	8
[2] 10,001-100,000	19
[3] 100,001-250,000	36
[4] 250,001-1,000,000	51
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,000	23
[6] over 10,000,001	6

2010 Survey Results
Product: Voyager		Response Distribution										Statistics
Category	Responses	0	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	Mode	Mean	Median
ILS Satisfaction	123			4	3	10	25	25	42	13	1	7	6.01	6
ILS Functionality	0											0	0.00
Print Functionality	0											0	0.00
Electronic Functionality	0											0	0.00
Company Satisfaction	123		1	5	5	11	18	30	39	13	1	7	5.90	6
Support Satisfaction	120		4	4	4	11	21	32	23	20	1	6	5.79	6
Support Improvement	118		3	3	6	11	52	14	18	11		5	5.33	5
Company Loyalty	121	2	3	4	5	13	27	15	28	17	7	7	5.77	6
Open Source Interest	120	11	16	16	14	9	18	9	8	9	10	5	4.07	4

Category	Total	Yes	percent
Considering new ILS	124	40	32.26%
Considering new Interface	124	64	51.61%
System Installed on time?	124	106	85.48%

Average Collection size:		1095582

Type	Count
Public	1
Academic	97
School	0
Consortium	1
Special	2

Size Category	Count
[1] Under 10,000	0
[2] 10,001-100,000	21
[3] 100,001-250,000	27
[4] 250,001-1,000,000	37
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,000	17
[6] over 10,000,001	2

2009 Survey Results
Product: Voyager		Response Distribution										Statistics
Category	Responses	0	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	Mode	Mean	Median
ILS Satisfaction	164			8	10	9	31	39	41	22	4	7	5.91	6
ILS Functionality	0											0	0.00
Print Functionality	0											0	0.00
Electronic Functionality	0											0	0.00
Company Satisfaction	162	1	1	7	12	17	23	35	45	19	2	7	5.73	6
Support Satisfaction	162	1	3	11	15	12	20	26	44	25	5	7	5.72	6
Support Improvement	153	2	5	8	8	18	54	17	17	18	6	5	5.27	5
Company Loyalty	160	11	5	5	11	14	22	20	42	17	13	7	5.51	6
Open Source Interest	164	24	19	23	11	8	23	16	19	12	9	0	3.97	4

Category	Total	Yes	percent
Considering new ILS	164	31	18.90%
Considering new Interface	164	89	54.27%
System Installed on time?	164	142	86.59%

2008 Survey Results
Product: Voyager		Response Distribution										Statistics
Category	Responses	0	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	Mode	Mean	Median
ILS Satisfaction	87			6	5	8	5	23	21	17	2	6	6.01	6
ILS Functionality	0											0	0.00
Print Functionality	0											0	0.00
Electronic Functionality	0											0	0.00
Company Satisfaction	87	1	1	5	9	5	16	15	23	11	1	7	5.59	6
Support Satisfaction	87	1	4	3	10	5	13	19	14	14	4	6	5.57	6
Support Improvement	0	not applicable
Company Loyalty	87	5	3	10	7	7	12	11	13	13	6	7	5.14	5
Open Source Interest	86	10	7	10	6	4	14	7	10	4	14	5	4.66	5

Category	Total	Yes	percent
Considering new ILS	87	19	21.84%
Considering new Interface	87	40	45.98%
System Installed on time?	87	83	95.40%

2007 Survey Results
Product: Voyager		Response Distribution										Statistics
Category	Responses	0	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	Mode	Mean	Median
ILS Satisfaction	83		1	3	12	3	17	19	22	5	1	7	5.51	6
ILS Functionality	0											0	0.00
Print Functionality	0											0	0.00
Electronic Functionality	0											0	0.00
Company Satisfaction	110	1	5	9	14	13	17	24	21	5	1	6	4.93	5
Support Satisfaction	108	4	5	9	13	14	14	18	19	10	2	7	4.88	5
Support Improvement	0	not applicable
Company Loyalty	105	16	2	11	13	9	25	9	8	6	6	5	4.15	5
Open Source Interest	107	10	8	12	12	13	12	15	12	6	7	6	4.35	4

Category	Total	Yes	percent
Considering new ILS	111	24	21.62%
Considering new Interface	111	53	47.75%
System Installed on time?	111	1	0.90%

2020 : gen: 5.73 company 6.68 loyalty 6.86 support 6.95

2019 : gen: 5.55 company 6.12 loyalty 6.86 support 6.63

2018 : gen: 5.27 company 6.29 loyalty 6.53 support 6.40

2017 : gen: 5.66 company 6.23 loyalty 6.57 support 6.23

2016 : gen: 5.58 company 5.98 loyalty 6.38 support 6.03

2015 : gen: 5.75 company 6.05 loyalty 6.27 support 6.08

2014 : gen: 5.78 company 5.93 loyalty 5.66 support 5.90

2013 : gen: 6.15 company 6.02 loyalty 6.21 support 5.86

2012 : gen: 5.75 company 5.76 loyalty 5.81 support 5.57

2011 : gen: 6.07 company 6.21 loyalty 6.10 support 6.16

2010 : gen: 6.01 company 5.90 loyalty 5.77 support 5.79

2009 : gen: 5.91 company 5.73 loyalty 5.51 support 5.72

2008 : gen: 6.01 company 5.59 loyalty 5.14 support 5.57

2007 : gen: 5.51 company 4.93 loyalty 4.15 support 4.88

Comments (survey2018)

When we implemented Voyager in 2001 it was very suitable for our needs at that time and still performs those functions well. We now require that same functionality and extra new functionality especially with regards to eresources management and bib and holdings data manipulation. A more modern system would provide this so we will be looking at the ILS market in the near future. (Library type: State; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 5)

Our information security folks disabled our ILS four years ago and then somehow lost the data that would have permitted a revival. ExLibris no longer does new installations of Voyager and suggested we move to Alma, but I don't think it's met all the FedRamp requirements (to say nothing of whatever our IA folks would demand) and it appears to be far more complicated than we need. Management doesn't appear to be interested in addressing this need, so we're relying on the tools we have. (Library type: Medical; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 5)

We are in the process of migrating to OCLC WMS. We have signed the contract. Migration will start in early 2019. I feel like this survey should ask about ERM functionality--satisfaction with current system and whether it is part of ILS migration consideration. (Library type: Academic; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 2)

While we're not actively seeking a new ILS at the moment, I am keeping my eye on the market with the expectation that our current ILS is nearing end-of-life. I do not believe the direction our current ILS vendor is taking will best serve our needs. (Library type: Independent Research; collection size: large; ils satisfaction: 7)

[...] (Library type: National; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 8)

Voyager as we have implemented it is very restrictive and limiting. We plan to go with Alma in the next year and look forward to being able to offer better services to our patrons and make better use of staff time. (Library type: Independent Research; collection size: large; ils satisfaction: 3)

We have started a migration process to Alma and Primo VE. So far the migration is on schedule and the vendor has been very helpful. We use open source solutions for many of our services (e.g. Islandora, DSpace, OJS) but the ILS solution is not yet mature. (Library type: Academic; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 6)

[...] Library is one of about 100 [...] that are migrating to Alma/Primo in the coming year. (Library type: Academic; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 5)

We are part of [...]consortium who have signed contract to move to Alma in 2019/2020. Responses in this survey relate to Voyager system currently in place, not to Alma which is not yet implemented. (Library type: Academic; collection size: large; ils satisfaction: 7)

Community support is waning for this product and upgrades are getting further apart. When we get the funding, we will move on. In the meantime, we will continue to adapt to its limitations regarding acquisitions, ebooks, and other staff tasks. (Library type: Academic; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 5)

We get our ILS through [...]. Therefore, we do not make any decisions solo. (Library type: Theology; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 7)

THIS # INCLUDES BOTH THE CAMPUS LIBRARIES' HOLDINGS. (Library type: Academic; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 2)

Voyager was good for what it was, but it is inefficient and out of date for our current needs. The university will be moving to OCLC WMS in July 2019, and the [...] will be dissolved at that time. (Library type: Academic; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 7)

We are part of state implementation of Alma/Primo but do not expect to go live until January 2020. (Library type: Academic; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 4)

We implemented Summon 2.0 in 2015 for discovery and export MARC records from the ILS (Voyager) into Summon, but it's not acting as a discovery layer per se. Note re: approx. # of vols. includes print and electronic materials plus microforms We still anticipate making a decision about a new ILS in the next 12 months. (Library type: Theology; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 5)

13 academic libraries in [...] have signed a contract for a new consortial shared LSP. This will be a new consortium, and could have more [...] . The comments above reflect an old Voyager system (it chugs along, reliable, support is good but there is really no development) with Summon discovery and Intota ERM/360 Link. Intota has been a disappointment as it was not developed from its initial form, and Summon is current but has some issues that we have discussed with Ex Libris, but some important ones have not been resolved, e.g. accurate date sort has been a sore point. We have talked with Ex Libris about it. We are currently in the onboarding/preparation phase for Alma/Primo, beginning implementation proper in Feb 2019, and go-live date December 2019. (Library type: Academic; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 2)

We are part of a statewide consortium that is in the beginning stages of transitioning from Voyager to Alma. This process will occur over the next 8 months. (Library type: Academic; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 6)

[...] (Library type: Academic; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 6)

We really don't have a choice in what ILS we use because we are part of a consortium that runs our ILS. (Library type: Academic; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 5)

[...] I state-wide consortium will be migrating to Alma within next couple years. We anticipate that 2019 will be our last full year using Voyager. (Library type: Academic; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 7)

[...] (Library type: Academic; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 6)

When the consortia started its process to develop an rfp for a new ILS, I had very much hoped that there would be an open source option. At that point, we were following developments with OLE in particular. Unfortunately, such systems have not matured to the degree that they were considered an option, by the time the rfp was issued. (Library type: Academic; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 4)

A decision was made as a system to move to Alma. I would like to check out what Folio developes into in the future and will keep tabs on its development and rollout throughout libraries. (Library type: Academic; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 6)

Voyager system is increasingly dated for our need and we are actively looking for a sustainable options for ILS. Folio development is definitely an exciting progress that we are paying close attention and we are likely to implement if Folio successfully matures. (Library type: Academic; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 4)

We presently have good relations with ExLibris. We would like to see how the field of Next Generation ILS's develop before making any move. (Library type: Academic; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 6)

A large consortia of [...] higher education libraries are moving to Alma in 2019-2020 (Library type: Academic; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 3)

ILS

Library Technology Guides is a service provided by Marshall Breeding, independent consultant, author, and speaker.