Statistical Report for Insignia
Statistics according to type and size categories
The following table presents the 2020 results according to the type and size of the library.
| 2020 Insignia Responses by Sector |
|---|
| Insignia | 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 | 10 | 6.10 |
1 | | 1 | | 0 | | 5 | | 0 | | 0 | | 2 | | 0 | |
|---|
| ILSFunctionality | 11 | 6.18 |
1 | | 1 | | 0 | | 5 | | 0 | | 0 | | 2 | | 0 | |
|---|
| PrintFunctionality | 11 | 6.36 |
1 | | 1 | | 0 | | 5 | | 0 | | 0 | | 2 | | 0 | |
|---|
| ElectronicFunctionality | 11 | 4.82 |
1 | | 1 | | 0 | | 5 | | 0 | | 0 | | 2 | | 0 | |
|---|
| SatisfactionCustomerSupport | 11 | 6.18 |
1 | | 1 | | 0 | | 5 | | 0 | | 0 | | 2 | | 0 | |
|---|
| CompanyLoyalty | 11 | 5.82 |
1 | | 1 | | 0 | | 5 | | 0 | | 0 | | 2 | | 0 | |
|---|
| 2020 Survey Results |
| Product: Insignia |
Response Distribution |
Statistics |
|---|
| Category | Responses |
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
Mode | Mean | Median |
|---|
| ILS Satisfaction | 10 |
| | 2 | 1 | | | 1 | 1 | 4 | 1 | 8 | 6.10 | 8 |
|---|
| ILS Functionality | 11 |
| | | 3 | | | 2 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 6.18 | 7 |
|---|
| Print Functionality | 11 |
| | 1 | 2 | | | 1 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 8 | 6.36 | 7 |
|---|
| Electronic Functionality | 11 |
| 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 4 | | | 1 | 6 | 4.82 | 5 |
|---|
| Company Satisfaction | 11 |
| | 3 | | | | | 2 | 5 | 1 | 8 | 6.27 | 8 |
|---|
| Support Satisfaction | 11 |
| | 3 | | | | 2 | | 4 | 2 | 8 | 6.18 | 8 |
|---|
| Support Improvement | 0 |
| | | | | | | | | | 0 | 0.00 | |
|---|
| Company Loyalty | 11 |
2 | 1 | | | | | 1 | 1 | 4 | 2 | 8 | 5.82 | 8 |
|---|
| Open Source Interest | 7 |
2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | | | 1 | | | | 0 | 1.86 | 1 |
|---|
| Category | Total | Yes | percent |
|---|
| Considering new ILS | 11 |
0 | 0.00% |
|---|
| Considering new Interface | 11 |
0 | 0.00% |
|---|
| System Installed on time? | 11 |
0 | 0.00% |
|---|
| Average Collection size: |
| 224211 |
|---|
| Type | Count |
|---|
| Public | 5 |
|---|
| Academic | 2 |
|---|
| School | 2 |
|---|
| Consortium | 0 |
|---|
| Special | 1 |
|---|
| Size Category | Count |
|---|
| [1] Under 10,000 | 1 |
|---|
| [2] 10,001-100,000 | 6 |
|---|
| [3] 100,001-250,000 | 0 |
|---|
| [4] 250,001-1,000,000 | 2 |
|---|
| [5] 1,000,001-10,000,000 | 1 |
|---|
| [6] over 10,000,001 | 0 |
|---|
| 2019 Survey Results |
| Product: Insignia |
Response Distribution |
Statistics |
|---|
| Category | Responses |
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
Mode | Mean | Median |
|---|
| ILS Satisfaction | 7 |
| | | 1 | | | | 4 | 1 | 1 | 7 | 6.86 | 7 |
|---|
| ILS Functionality | 7 |
| | | 1 | | | 2 | 3 | | 1 | 7 | 6.43 | 7 |
|---|
| Print Functionality | 7 |
| | | 1 | 1 | | | 3 | 1 | 1 | 7 | 6.43 | 7 |
|---|
| Electronic Functionality | 7 |
| 1 | | 2 | | | 1 | 2 | | 1 | 3 | 5.14 | 6 |
|---|
| Company Satisfaction | 7 |
| | | 1 | | | | 3 | 2 | 1 | 7 | 7.00 | 7 |
|---|
| Support Satisfaction | 7 |
| | | | | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 7 | 7.14 | 7 |
|---|
| Support Improvement | 7 |
| | | | | 2 | 2 | 2 | | 1 | 5 | 6.43 | 6 |
|---|
| Company Loyalty | 7 |
| 1 | | | | | | 2 | 2 | 2 | 7 | 7.00 | 8 |
|---|
| Open Source Interest | 7 |
3 | 2 | | | 1 | | 1 | | | | 0 | 1.71 | 1 |
|---|
| Category | Total | Yes | percent |
|---|
| Considering new ILS | 7 |
0 | 0.00% |
|---|
| Considering new Interface | 7 |
0 | 0.00% |
|---|
| System Installed on time? | 7 |
6 | 85.71% |
|---|
| Average Collection size: |
| 285139 |
|---|
| Type | Count |
|---|
| Public | 4 |
|---|
| Academic | 1 |
|---|
| School | 2 |
|---|
| Consortium | 0 |
|---|
| Special | 0 |
|---|
| Size Category | Count |
|---|
| [1] Under 10,000 | 0 |
|---|
| [2] 10,001-100,000 | 4 |
|---|
| [3] 100,001-250,000 | 0 |
|---|
| [4] 250,001-1,000,000 | 1 |
|---|
| [5] 1,000,001-10,000,000 | 1 |
|---|
| [6] over 10,000,001 | 0 |
|---|
| 5 Responses for Insignia in 2018 |
| 2 Responses for Insignia in 2017 |
| 3 Responses for Insignia in 2016 |
| 5 Responses for Insignia in 2015 |
| 4 Responses for Insignia in 2014 |
| 2013 Survey Results |
| Product: Insignia |
Response Distribution |
Statistics |
|---|
| Category | Responses |
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
Mode | Mean | Median |
|---|
| ILS Satisfaction | 6 |
| | 2 | | | 1 | | | 1 | 2 | 2 | 5.83 | 8 |
|---|
| ILS Functionality | 6 |
| | 1 | | 1 | 1 | | | 1 | 2 | 9 | 6.17 | 8 |
|---|
| Print Functionality | 6 |
| | | | 1 | | 1 | 1 | 3 | | 8 | 6.83 | 8 |
|---|
| Electronic Functionality | 6 |
| | | | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | | 4 | 5.67 | 6 |
|---|
| Company Satisfaction | 6 |
| 1 | | 1 | 1 | | | 1 | | 2 | 9 | 5.50 | 7 |
|---|
| Support Satisfaction | 6 |
| 1 | | | | 1 | | | 2 | 2 | 8 | 6.67 | 8 |
|---|
| Support Improvement | 6 |
| 1 | | | 1 | 1 | | | 2 | 1 | 8 | 5.83 | 8 |
|---|
| Company Loyalty | 6 |
2 | | | | 1 | 1 | | | | 2 | 0 | 4.50 | 5 |
|---|
| Open Source Interest | 6 |
| 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | | 1 | | | | 3 | 3.17 | 3 |
|---|
| Category | Total | Yes | percent |
|---|
| Considering new ILS | 6 |
0 | 0.00% |
|---|
| Considering new Interface | 6 |
0 | 0.00% |
|---|
| System Installed on time? | 6 |
5 | 83.33% |
|---|
| Average Collection size: |
| 32561 |
|---|
| Type | Count |
|---|
| Public | 5 |
|---|
| Academic | 1 |
|---|
| School | 0 |
|---|
| Consortium | 0 |
|---|
| Special | 0 |
|---|
| Size Category | Count |
|---|
| [1] Under 10,000 | 1 |
|---|
| [2] 10,001-100,000 | 4 |
|---|
| [3] 100,001-250,000 | 0 |
|---|
| [4] 250,001-1,000,000 | 0 |
|---|
| [5] 1,000,001-10,000,000 | 0 |
|---|
| [6] over 10,000,001 | 0 |
|---|
| 3 Responses for Insignia in 2012 |
| 2 Responses for Insignia in 2011 |
| 4 Responses for Insignia in 2010 |
| 2 Responses for Insignia in 2009 |
| 2 Responses for Insignia in 2008 |
| 0 Responses for Insignia in 2007 |
2020 : gen: 6.10 company 6.27 loyalty 5.82 support 6.18
2019 : gen: 6.86 company 7.00 loyalty 7.00 support 7.14
2013 : gen: 5.83 company 5.50 loyalty 4.50 support 6.67
Comments (survey2020)
We are happy that the vendor has been responsive to our functionality improvement requests, but there is always room for improvement. They have been working hard on increasing the number of technical support staff, but, there is a definite knowledge gap that as a customer of two years, we are not used to. We are happy that our ILS provider is working alongside us to implement mechanisms by which our customers will more readily be able to find Canadian content.
(Library type: School; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 8)
This library was required by higher headquarters to migrate to a shared ILS, and the [...] chose Insignia.
There are numerous issues with Insignia that leave it less than desirable product:
1) However, I do not believe that Insignia provides a real discovery layer or federated search since there is no metadata provided by Insignia. So far it can include title level information from EBSCO, but doesn't provide a robust federated search. It doesn't offer facets, or subject searching, or any ability to refine or limit. Insignia does not provide a federated search for other databases. Army University has linked up Military Periscope, Country Watch and ProQuest with an icon for logged in users to click on, then it will lead the user to the other databases. The user doesn't have the opportunity to use the one search box (search everything) feature on the AULS subscription databases for most of their subscriptions. Until Insignia works out their federated search capability, I would say they are not offering a real discovery layer.
2)The Collection Analysis offered is insufficient and doesn't appear to adequately address age of the collection. The collection analysis tool cannot reach back to a date prior to 1910. That means it is giving a wildly inaccurate date for the average age of the collection. There are over 13,000 items in the collection that are out of range of its analysis. It doesn't offer analysis by LC, just Dewey for this feature.
3)Its Digital module is not compatible with Dublin Core.
4) This Insignia ILS is probably sufficient for an elementary or high school, and I could see some public libraries embracing it for it's ease of use, but it isn't robust enough for an academic library or a government library of this size or with these various item types.
5)Insignia is very modular. The modules do not correlate or work well together. If is not user focused. For example, texts cataloged in the textbook module have to be searched in that module, they cannot be found in the regular catalog, That in and of itself defeats the idea of a "discovery layer." Insignia simply doesn't have it.
Thank you
(Library type: Academic; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 3)