Statistical Report for Polaris
2022 Survey Results |
Product: Polaris |
Response Distribution |
Statistics |
Category | Responses |
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
Mode | Mean | Median |
ILS Satisfaction | 163 |
| 1 | 1 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 14 | 55 | 46 | 37 | 7 | 7.40 | 8 |
ILS Functionality | 162 |
| | | 4 | 2 | 4 | 15 | 44 | 55 | 38 | 8 | 7.53 | 8 |
Print Functionality | 162 |
| | | 1 | 1 | 4 | 10 | 34 | 58 | 54 | 8 | 7.87 | 8 |
Electronic Functionality | 161 |
3 | 5 | 7 | 12 | 8 | 17 | 24 | 43 | 23 | 19 | 7 | 6.04 | 7 |
Company Satisfaction | 161 |
| 1 | 2 | 4 | 5 | 14 | 24 | 38 | 35 | 38 | 7 | 7.07 | 7 |
Support Satisfaction | 157 |
1 | | 3 | 4 | 7 | 14 | 18 | 31 | 44 | 35 | 8 | 7.06 | 8 |
Support Improvement | 0 |
| | | | | | | | | | 0 | 0.00 | |
Company Loyalty | 161 |
6 | 2 | 1 | 3 | 5 | 23 | 9 | 32 | 39 | 41 | 9 | 6.88 | 7 |
Open Source Interest | 158 |
51 | 7 | 15 | 12 | 10 | 34 | 11 | 5 | 5 | 7 | 0 | 3.15 | 3 |
Category | Total | Yes | percent |
Considering new ILS | 171 |
8 | 4.68% |
Considering new Interface | 171 |
1 | 0.58% |
System Installed on time? | 171 |
0 | 0.00% |
Average Collection size: |
| 443509 |
Type | Count |
Public | 144 |
Academic | 7 |
School | 0 |
Consortium | 9 |
Special | 0 |
Size Category | Count |
[1] Under 10,000 | 6 |
[2] 10,001-100,000 | 65 |
[3] 100,001-250,000 | 38 |
[4] 250,001-1,000,000 | 35 |
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,000 | 17 |
[6] over 10,000,001 | 0 |
2021 Survey Results |
Product: Polaris |
Response Distribution |
Statistics |
Category | Responses |
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
Mode | Mean | Median |
ILS Satisfaction | 176 |
| | 1 | 3 | 1 | 5 | 16 | 45 | 64 | 41 | 8 | 7.57 | 8 |
ILS Functionality | 176 |
| | 2 | 3 | | 2 | 18 | 51 | 60 | 40 | 8 | 7.55 | 8 |
Print Functionality | 173 |
| | 2 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 7 | 33 | 67 | 57 | 8 | 7.83 | 8 |
Electronic Functionality | 171 |
3 | 2 | 8 | 7 | 14 | 16 | 26 | 44 | 28 | 23 | 7 | 6.26 | 7 |
Company Satisfaction | 174 |
| | 2 | 5 | 5 | 9 | 21 | 49 | 50 | 33 | 8 | 7.18 | 7 |
Support Satisfaction | 171 |
| | 1 | 4 | 6 | 8 | 23 | 40 | 47 | 42 | 8 | 7.31 | 8 |
Support Improvement | 0 |
| | | | | | | | | | 0 | 0.00 | |
Company Loyalty | 175 |
1 | | 2 | 6 | 7 | 13 | 15 | 34 | 46 | 51 | 9 | 7.26 | 8 |
Open Source Interest | 153 |
47 | 17 | 14 | 10 | 9 | 23 | 12 | 11 | 2 | 3 | 0 | 3.06 | 2 |
Category | Total | Yes | percent |
Considering new ILS | 184 |
13 | 7.07% |
Considering new Interface | 184 |
0 | 0.00% |
System Installed on time? | 184 |
0 | 0.00% |
Average Collection size: |
| 594603 |
Type | Count |
Public | 144 |
Academic | 8 |
School | 1 |
Consortium | 12 |
Special | 1 |
Size Category | Count |
[1] Under 10,000 | 4 |
[2] 10,001-100,000 | 78 |
[3] 100,001-250,000 | 44 |
[4] 250,001-1,000,000 | 33 |
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,000 | 17 |
[6] over 10,000,001 | 2 |
Statistics according to type and size categories
The following table presents the 2020 results according to the type and size of the library.
2020 Polaris Responses by Sector |
Polaris | 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 | 158 | 7.46 |
5 | | 1 | | 0 | | 77 | 7.27 | 40 | 7.63 | 16 | 7.50 | 1 | | 12 | 7.67 |
ILSFunctionality | 157 | 7.34 |
5 | | 1 | | 0 | | 76 | 7.28 | 40 | 7.40 | 16 | 7.00 | 1 | | 12 | 7.33 |
PrintFunctionality | 158 | 7.84 |
5 | | 1 | | 0 | | 77 | 7.69 | 40 | 8.00 | 16 | 8.06 | 1 | | 12 | 7.75 |
ElectronicFunctionality | 155 | 6.21 |
5 | | 1 | | 0 | | 76 | 6.29 | 40 | 6.30 | 15 | 5.20 | 0 | | 12 | 6.25 |
SatisfactionCustomerSupport | 148 | 7.31 |
4 | | 1 | | 0 | | 70 | 7.19 | 39 | 7.33 | 16 | 7.81 | 0 | | 12 | 7.50 |
CompanyLoyalty | 154 | 7.10 |
5 | | 1 | | 0 | | 77 | 7.01 | 36 | 7.31 | 16 | 7.75 | 1 | | 12 | 7.42 |
2020 Survey Results |
Product: Polaris |
Response Distribution |
Statistics |
Category | Responses |
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
Mode | Mean | Median |
ILS Satisfaction | 158 |
1 | | 1 | 2 | 2 | 5 | 13 | 41 | 64 | 29 | 8 | 7.46 | 8 |
ILS Functionality | 157 |
1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 7 | 16 | 45 | 50 | 32 | 8 | 7.34 | 8 |
Print Functionality | 158 |
1 | | 1 | | 1 | 2 | 10 | 29 | 67 | 47 | 8 | 7.84 | 8 |
Electronic Functionality | 155 |
5 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 8 | 18 | 40 | 37 | 26 | 13 | 6 | 6.21 | 6 |
Company Satisfaction | 154 |
1 | | 2 | 1 | 1 | 15 | 26 | 35 | 49 | 24 | 8 | 7.11 | 7 |
Support Satisfaction | 148 |
1 | | 2 | 2 | 3 | 15 | 13 | 31 | 40 | 40 | 8 | 7.31 | 8 |
Support Improvement | 0 |
| | | | | | | | | | 0 | 0.00 | |
Company Loyalty | 154 |
5 | | 2 | 1 | 3 | 12 | 16 | 37 | 42 | 36 | 8 | 7.10 | 8 |
Open Source Interest | 137 |
46 | 17 | 14 | 9 | 5 | 19 | 10 | 8 | 6 | 3 | 0 | 2.76 | 2 |
Category | Total | Yes | percent |
Considering new ILS | 164 |
12 | 7.32% |
Considering new Interface | 164 |
0 | 0.00% |
System Installed on time? | 164 |
0 | 0.00% |
Average Collection size: |
| 630672 |
Type | Count |
Public | 142 |
Academic | 6 |
School | 1 |
Consortium | 12 |
Special | 0 |
Size Category | Count |
[1] Under 10,000 | 3 |
[2] 10,001-100,000 | 55 |
[3] 100,001-250,000 | 35 |
[4] 250,001-1,000,000 | 38 |
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,000 | 22 |
[6] over 10,000,001 | 2 |
2019 Survey Results |
Product: Polaris |
Response Distribution |
Statistics |
Category | Responses |
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
Mode | Mean | Median |
ILS Satisfaction | 220 |
| | | 5 | 5 | 10 | 25 | 51 | 77 | 47 | 8 | 7.41 | 8 |
ILS Functionality | 219 |
| | | 6 | 4 | 7 | 31 | 58 | 70 | 43 | 8 | 7.34 | 8 |
Print Functionality | 215 |
1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 5 | 17 | 39 | 82 | 66 | 8 | 7.74 | 8 |
Electronic Functionality | 218 |
6 | 2 | 6 | 15 | 18 | 28 | 22 | 54 | 34 | 33 | 7 | 6.19 | 7 |
Company Satisfaction | 216 |
2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 10 | 28 | 23 | 52 | 51 | 38 | 7 | 6.75 | 7 |
Support Satisfaction | 214 |
1 | 2 | 4 | 10 | 7 | 22 | 28 | 33 | 54 | 53 | 8 | 6.94 | 8 |
Support Improvement | 212 |
2 | 1 | 8 | 7 | 19 | 72 | 26 | 18 | 28 | 31 | 5 | 5.94 | 5 |
Company Loyalty | 210 |
7 | 6 | 6 | 5 | 11 | 24 | 23 | 43 | 47 | 38 | 8 | 6.45 | 7 |
Open Source Interest | 208 |
62 | 28 | 24 | 17 | 20 | 30 | 9 | 4 | 4 | 10 | 0 | 2.70 | 2 |
Category | Total | Yes | percent |
Considering new ILS | 227 |
19 | 8.37% |
Considering new Interface | 227 |
16 | 7.05% |
System Installed on time? | 227 |
203 | 89.43% |
Average Collection size: |
| 491957 |
Type | Count |
Public | 198 |
Academic | 9 |
School | 1 |
Consortium | 14 |
Special | 1 |
Size Category | Count |
[1] Under 10,000 | 21 |
[2] 10,001-100,000 | 86 |
[3] 100,001-250,000 | 42 |
[4] 250,001-1,000,000 | 44 |
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,000 | 18 |
[6] over 10,000,001 | 1 |
2018 Survey Results |
Product: Polaris |
Response Distribution |
Statistics |
Category | Responses |
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
Mode | Mean | Median |
ILS Satisfaction | 258 |
1 | 2 | 1 | 4 | 3 | 11 | 20 | 77 | 86 | 53 | 8 | 7.39 | 8 |
ILS Functionality | 256 |
| 2 | 1 | 4 | 3 | 11 | 22 | 69 | 99 | 45 | 8 | 7.40 | 8 |
Print Functionality | 252 |
4 | | | 1 | 4 | 6 | 12 | 46 | 121 | 58 | 8 | 7.67 | 8 |
Electronic Functionality | 253 |
8 | 4 | 4 | 6 | 12 | 29 | 45 | 59 | 52 | 34 | 7 | 6.43 | 7 |
Company Satisfaction | 252 |
5 | 4 | 3 | 13 | 8 | 28 | 35 | 57 | 61 | 38 | 8 | 6.59 | 7 |
Support Satisfaction | 251 |
1 | 5 | 3 | 7 | 15 | 19 | 28 | 54 | 62 | 57 | 8 | 6.94 | 7 |
Support Improvement | 247 |
8 | 3 | 9 | 6 | 26 | 79 | 30 | 27 | 30 | 29 | 5 | 5.70 | 5 |
Company Loyalty | 247 |
10 | 2 | 7 | 9 | 11 | 34 | 19 | 49 | 57 | 49 | 8 | 6.52 | 7 |
Open Source Interest | 248 |
69 | 31 | 36 | 22 | 29 | 32 | 12 | 6 | 4 | 7 | 0 | 2.64 | 2 |
Category | Total | Yes | percent |
Considering new ILS | 270 |
22 | 8.15% |
Considering new Interface | 270 |
26 | 9.63% |
System Installed on time? | 270 |
248 | 91.85% |
Average Collection size: |
| 427048 |
Type | Count |
Public | 243 |
Academic | 9 |
School | 0 |
Consortium | 17 |
Special | 0 |
Size Category | Count |
[1] Under 10,000 | 20 |
[2] 10,001-100,000 | 99 |
[3] 100,001-250,000 | 50 |
[4] 250,001-1,000,000 | 58 |
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,000 | 22 |
[6] over 10,000,001 | 0 |
2017 Survey Results |
Product: Polaris |
Response Distribution |
Statistics |
Category | Responses |
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
Mode | Mean | Median |
ILS Satisfaction | 263 |
1 | | 4 | 1 | 7 | 14 | 31 | 73 | 87 | 45 | 8 | 7.25 | 8 |
ILS Functionality | 261 |
| | 2 | 6 | 4 | 9 | 21 | 85 | 93 | 41 | 8 | 7.34 | 8 |
Print Functionality | 263 |
1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 9 | 14 | 50 | 104 | 77 | 8 | 7.71 | 8 |
Electronic Functionality | 257 |
4 | 2 | 14 | 6 | 15 | 24 | 43 | 57 | 59 | 33 | 8 | 6.44 | 7 |
Company Satisfaction | 259 |
3 | 2 | 4 | 5 | 14 | 34 | 32 | 63 | 63 | 39 | 7 | 6.71 | 7 |
Support Satisfaction | 248 |
2 | 3 | 4 | 8 | 11 | 15 | 30 | 69 | 61 | 45 | 7 | 6.90 | 7 |
Support Improvement | 244 |
11 | 2 | 6 | 12 | 24 | 69 | 23 | 35 | 29 | 33 | 5 | 5.75 | 5 |
Company Loyalty | 255 |
9 | 5 | 3 | 7 | 20 | 23 | 29 | 47 | 54 | 58 | 9 | 6.60 | 7 |
Open Source Interest | 256 |
90 | 28 | 38 | 23 | 26 | 22 | 12 | 7 | 4 | 6 | 0 | 2.32 | 2 |
Category | Total | Yes | percent |
Considering new ILS | 267 |
20 | 7.49% |
Considering new Interface | 267 |
30 | 11.24% |
System Installed on time? | 267 |
247 | 92.51% |
Average Collection size: |
| 418065 |
Type | Count |
Public | 228 |
Academic | 11 |
School | 3 |
Consortium | 21 |
Special | 2 |
Size Category | Count |
[1] Under 10,000 | 11 |
[2] 10,001-100,000 | 119 |
[3] 100,001-250,000 | 51 |
[4] 250,001-1,000,000 | 51 |
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,000 | 30 |
[6] over 10,000,001 | 0 |
2016 Survey Results |
Product: Polaris |
Response Distribution |
Statistics |
Category | Responses |
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
Mode | Mean | Median |
ILS Satisfaction | 216 |
| 1 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 6 | 29 | 60 | 69 | 43 | 8 | 7.35 | 8 |
ILS Functionality | 218 |
| 2 | 3 | 2 | 4 | 11 | 26 | 61 | 69 | 40 | 8 | 7.25 | 8 |
Print Functionality | 213 |
| 1 | | 2 | 2 | 6 | 14 | 50 | 76 | 62 | 8 | 7.72 | 8 |
Electronic Functionality | 212 |
9 | 1 | 5 | 8 | 13 | 20 | 34 | 59 | 35 | 28 | 7 | 6.30 | 7 |
Company Satisfaction | 213 |
1 | | 8 | 3 | 9 | 22 | 29 | 53 | 51 | 37 | 7 | 6.84 | 7 |
Support Satisfaction | 212 |
1 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 14 | 18 | 37 | 41 | 47 | 48 | 9 | 6.96 | 7 |
Support Improvement | 205 |
7 | 3 | 8 | 7 | 26 | 62 | 17 | 37 | 18 | 20 | 5 | 5.56 | 5 |
Company Loyalty | 213 |
8 | 1 | | 5 | 17 | 22 | 22 | 40 | 51 | 47 | 8 | 6.75 | 7 |
Open Source Interest | 215 |
92 | 30 | 28 | 15 | 20 | 15 | 6 | 5 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 1.82 | 1 |
Category | Total | Yes | percent |
Considering new ILS | 219 |
17 | 7.76% |
Considering new Interface | 219 |
23 | 10.50% |
System Installed on time? | 219 |
205 | 93.61% |
Average Collection size: |
| 453385 |
Type | Count |
Public | 180 |
Academic | 17 |
School | 4 |
Consortium | 15 |
Special | 2 |
Size Category | Count |
[1] Under 10,000 | 9 |
[2] 10,001-100,000 | 98 |
[3] 100,001-250,000 | 42 |
[4] 250,001-1,000,000 | 38 |
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,000 | 22 |
[6] over 10,000,001 | 0 |
2015 Survey Results |
Product: Polaris |
Response Distribution |
Statistics |
Category | Responses |
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
Mode | Mean | Median |
ILS Satisfaction | 206 |
| | 3 | 4 | 2 | 9 | 24 | 69 | 61 | 34 | 7 | 7.24 | 7 |
ILS Functionality | 207 |
1 | | 2 | 4 | 1 | 13 | 22 | 50 | 82 | 32 | 8 | 7.30 | 8 |
Print Functionality | 207 |
3 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 10 | 8 | 36 | 94 | 50 | 8 | 7.57 | 8 |
Electronic Functionality | 206 |
3 | 3 | 4 | 15 | 7 | 31 | 35 | 52 | 33 | 23 | 7 | 6.23 | 7 |
Company Satisfaction | 206 |
1 | 2 | 3 | 7 | 7 | 29 | 34 | 43 | 54 | 26 | 8 | 6.67 | 7 |
Support Satisfaction | 204 |
| 2 | 3 | 5 | 13 | 25 | 27 | 30 | 56 | 43 | 8 | 6.90 | 7 |
Support Improvement | 195 |
7 | 3 | 11 | 18 | 20 | 58 | 13 | 27 | 18 | 20 | 5 | 5.33 | 5 |
Company Loyalty | 198 |
5 | 3 | 5 | 9 | 12 | 18 | 21 | 33 | 50 | 42 | 8 | 6.63 | 7 |
Open Source Interest | 204 |
82 | 27 | 27 | 16 | 17 | 15 | 9 | 4 | 1 | 6 | 0 | 2.04 | 1 |
Category | Total | Yes | percent |
Considering new ILS | 215 |
17 | 7.91% |
Considering new Interface | 215 |
26 | 12.09% |
System Installed on time? | 215 |
197 | 91.63% |
Average Collection size: |
| 459670 |
Type | Count |
Public | 184 |
Academic | 11 |
School | 0 |
Consortium | 18 |
Special | 0 |
Size Category | Count |
[1] Under 10,000 | 4 |
[2] 10,001-100,000 | 97 |
[3] 100,001-250,000 | 46 |
[4] 250,001-1,000,000 | 43 |
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,000 | 25 |
[6] over 10,000,001 | 0 |
2014 Survey Results |
Product: Polaris |
Response Distribution |
Statistics |
Category | Responses |
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
Mode | Mean | Median |
ILS Satisfaction | 169 |
| | 1 | 1 | 1 | 8 | 19 | 43 | 59 | 37 | 8 | 7.51 | 8 |
ILS Functionality | 169 |
1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 6 | 20 | 46 | 59 | 33 | 8 | 7.40 | 8 |
Print Functionality | 167 |
3 | 1 | 1 | | 1 | 5 | 9 | 33 | 64 | 50 | 8 | 7.66 | 8 |
Electronic Functionality | 164 |
5 | | 3 | 7 | 12 | 22 | 34 | 34 | 33 | 14 | 6 | 6.20 | 6 |
Company Satisfaction | 168 |
| 1 | 1 | 1 | 6 | 9 | 25 | 46 | 44 | 35 | 7 | 7.23 | 7 |
Support Satisfaction | 165 |
| 1 | 4 | 4 | 6 | 2 | 14 | 41 | 49 | 44 | 8 | 7.36 | 8 |
Support Improvement | 161 |
4 | 3 | 5 | 7 | 20 | 48 | 16 | 22 | 20 | 16 | 5 | 5.64 | 5 |
Company Loyalty | 167 |
6 | | 1 | 2 | 9 | 9 | 20 | 29 | 43 | 48 | 9 | 7.11 | 8 |
Open Source Interest | 161 |
63 | 22 | 16 | 13 | 16 | 14 | 6 | 8 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 2.14 | 1 |
Category | Total | Yes | percent |
Considering new ILS | 170 |
9 | 5.29% |
Considering new Interface | 170 |
16 | 9.41% |
System Installed on time? | 170 |
164 | 96.47% |
Average Collection size: |
| 570334 |
Type | Count |
Public | 143 |
Academic | 10 |
School | 0 |
Consortium | 14 |
Special | 1 |
Size Category | Count |
[1] Under 10,000 | 6 |
[2] 10,001-100,000 | 63 |
[3] 100,001-250,000 | 45 |
[4] 250,001-1,000,000 | 33 |
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,000 | 20 |
[6] over 10,000,001 | 1 |
2013 Survey Results |
Product: Polaris |
Response Distribution |
Statistics |
Category | Responses |
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
Mode | Mean | Median |
ILS Satisfaction | 138 |
| | | 1 | | 9 | 10 | 34 | 49 | 35 | 8 | 7.63 | 8 |
ILS Functionality | 138 |
| | | 3 | | 6 | 12 | 36 | 51 | 30 | 8 | 7.54 | 8 |
Print Functionality | 136 |
2 | | | 2 | 2 | 8 | 7 | 19 | 52 | 44 | 8 | 7.65 | 8 |
Electronic Functionality | 136 |
3 | 3 | 3 | 6 | 8 | 19 | 22 | 22 | 36 | 14 | 8 | 6.28 | 7 |
Company Satisfaction | 136 |
| | 1 | | 1 | 11 | 7 | 27 | 46 | 43 | 8 | 7.70 | 8 |
Support Satisfaction | 137 |
| | | 3 | 2 | 11 | 9 | 30 | 41 | 41 | 8 | 7.54 | 8 |
Support Improvement | 135 |
| 1 | 1 | 4 | 2 | 32 | 15 | 22 | 27 | 31 | 5 | 6.83 | 7 |
Company Loyalty | 137 |
2 | | 1 | 3 | 3 | 8 | 8 | 23 | 29 | 60 | 9 | 7.62 | 8 |
Open Source Interest | 134 |
60 | 18 | 20 | 8 | 5 | 13 | 3 | 5 | | 2 | 0 | 1.78 | 1 |
Category | Total | Yes | percent |
Considering new ILS | 143 |
1 | 0.70% |
Considering new Interface | 143 |
15 | 10.49% |
System Installed on time? | 143 |
132 | 92.31% |
Average Collection size: |
| 532870 |
Type | Count |
Public | 118 |
Academic | 11 |
School | 1 |
Consortium | 11 |
Special | 1 |
Size Category | Count |
[1] Under 10,000 | 2 |
[2] 10,001-100,000 | 57 |
[3] 100,001-250,000 | 42 |
[4] 250,001-1,000,000 | 18 |
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,000 | 16 |
[6] over 10,000,001 | 1 |
2012 Survey Results |
Product: Polaris |
Response Distribution |
Statistics |
Category | Responses |
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
Mode | Mean | Median |
ILS Satisfaction | 152 |
| | | | 2 | 4 | 8 | 29 | 64 | 45 | 8 | 7.87 | 8 |
ILS Functionality | 152 |
| | | 1 | 1 | 4 | 8 | 54 | 51 | 33 | 7 | 7.62 | 8 |
Print Functionality | 0 |
| | | | | | | | | | 0 | 0.00 | |
Electronic Functionality | 0 |
| | | | | | | | | | 0 | 0.00 | |
Company Satisfaction | 151 |
| | 2 | 2 | 1 | 6 | 9 | 17 | 60 | 54 | 8 | 7.83 | 8 |
Support Satisfaction | 152 |
1 | | 3 | | 2 | 5 | 11 | 44 | 44 | 42 | 7 | 7.52 | 8 |
Support Improvement | 144 |
| | 2 | 3 | 8 | 50 | 19 | 17 | 16 | 29 | 5 | 6.37 | 6 |
Company Loyalty | 152 |
1 | | 1 | | 2 | 14 | 3 | 21 | 24 | 86 | 9 | 7.97 | 9 |
Open Source Interest | 149 |
50 | 19 | 23 | 22 | 12 | 10 | 8 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2.11 | 2 |
Category | Total | Yes | percent |
Considering new ILS | 161 |
2 | 1.24% |
Considering new Interface | 161 |
6 | 3.73% |
System Installed on time? | 161 |
150 | 93.17% |
Average Collection size: |
| 411671 |
Type | Count |
Public | 140 |
Academic | 8 |
School | 1 |
Consortium | 9 |
Special | 2 |
Size Category | Count |
[1] Under 10,000 | 2 |
[2] 10,001-100,000 | 54 |
[3] 100,001-250,000 | 43 |
[4] 250,001-1,000,000 | 27 |
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,000 | 27 |
[6] over 10,000,001 | 0 |
2011 Survey Results |
Product: Polaris |
Response Distribution |
Statistics |
Category | Responses |
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
Mode | Mean | Median |
ILS Satisfaction | 102 |
| | | 4 | 1 | 3 | 3 | 19 | 37 | 35 | 8 | 7.77 | 8 |
ILS Functionality | 102 |
| | | 1 | | 4 | 8 | 20 | 46 | 23 | 8 | 7.71 | 8 |
Print Functionality | 0 |
| | | | | | | | | | 0 | 0.00 | |
Electronic Functionality | 0 |
| | | | | | | | | | 0 | 0.00 | |
Company Satisfaction | 100 |
| | 1 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 4 | 15 | 36 | 37 | 9 | 7.80 | 8 |
Support Satisfaction | 100 |
| | 2 | 2 | 4 | 2 | 6 | 22 | 29 | 33 | 9 | 7.55 | 8 |
Support Improvement | 97 |
3 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 6 | 23 | 10 | 12 | 18 | 20 | 5 | 6.37 | 7 |
Company Loyalty | 100 |
1 | | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 9 | 28 | 52 | 9 | 7.95 | 9 |
Open Source Interest | 99 |
46 | 12 | 20 | 8 | 2 | 6 | 3 | 1 | 1 | | 0 | 1.48 | 1 |
Category | Total | Yes | percent |
Considering new ILS | 106 |
2 | 1.89% |
Considering new Interface | 106 |
8 | 7.55% |
System Installed on time? | 106 |
101 | 95.28% |
Average Collection size: |
| 541249 |
Type | Count |
Public | 91 |
Academic | 3 |
School | 1 |
Consortium | 9 |
Special | 1 |
Size Category | Count |
[1] Under 10,000 | 4 |
[2] 10,001-100,000 | 39 |
[3] 100,001-250,000 | 22 |
[4] 250,001-1,000,000 | 20 |
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,000 | 15 |
[6] over 10,000,001 | 1 |
2010 Survey Results |
Product: Polaris |
Response Distribution |
Statistics |
Category | Responses |
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
Mode | Mean | Median |
ILS Satisfaction | 101 |
| | 1 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 3 | 17 | 42 | 32 | 8 | 7.77 | 8 |
ILS Functionality | 0 |
| | | | | | | | | | 0 | 0.00 | |
Print Functionality | 0 |
| | | | | | | | | | 0 | 0.00 | |
Electronic Functionality | 0 |
| | | | | | | | | | 0 | 0.00 | |
Company Satisfaction | 100 |
| | 2 | | 2 | 6 | 3 | 14 | 32 | 41 | 9 | 7.83 | 8 |
Support Satisfaction | 101 |
| | 1 | 4 | 1 | 4 | 3 | 18 | 30 | 40 | 9 | 7.74 | 8 |
Support Improvement | 100 |
1 | | 1 | 2 | 3 | 17 | 11 | 6 | 33 | 26 | 8 | 7.11 | 8 |
Company Loyalty | 100 |
1 | 1 | | 1 | 2 | 4 | 6 | 8 | 25 | 52 | 9 | 7.92 | 9 |
Open Source Interest | 100 |
41 | 13 | 17 | 6 | 6 | 5 | 5 | 4 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 1.98 | 1 |
Category | Total | Yes | percent |
Considering new ILS | 104 |
6 | 5.77% |
Considering new Interface | 104 |
10 | 9.62% |
System Installed on time? | 104 |
99 | 95.19% |
Average Collection size: |
| 356804 |
Type | Count |
Public | 92 |
Academic | 6 |
School | 0 |
Consortium | 6 |
Special | 0 |
Size Category | Count |
[1] Under 10,000 | 2 |
[2] 10,001-100,000 | 33 |
[3] 100,001-250,000 | 20 |
[4] 250,001-1,000,000 | 17 |
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,000 | 9 |
[6] over 10,000,001 | 0 |
2009 Survey Results |
Product: Polaris |
Response Distribution |
Statistics |
Category | Responses |
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
Mode | Mean | Median |
ILS Satisfaction | 92 |
1 | | 1 | | 2 | 1 | 1 | 13 | 52 | 21 | 8 | 7.79 | 8 |
ILS Functionality | 0 |
| | | | | | | | | | 0 | 0.00 | |
Print Functionality | 0 |
| | | | | | | | | | 0 | 0.00 | |
Electronic Functionality | 0 |
| | | | | | | | | | 0 | 0.00 | |
Company Satisfaction | 92 |
1 | | 1 | 1 | | 4 | 4 | 6 | 48 | 27 | 8 | 7.80 | 8 |
Support Satisfaction | 91 |
2 | | | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 17 | 45 | 22 | 8 | 7.68 | 8 |
Support Improvement | 87 |
3 | 1 | | 1 | 3 | 13 | 12 | 8 | 29 | 17 | 8 | 6.83 | 8 |
Company Loyalty | 91 |
3 | 1 | 1 | | 1 | 5 | 2 | 5 | 37 | 36 | 8 | 7.68 | 8 |
Open Source Interest | 90 |
27 | 21 | 13 | 2 | 6 | 10 | 4 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 2.28 | 1 |
Category | Total | Yes | percent |
Considering new ILS | 92 |
6 | 6.52% |
Considering new Interface | 92 |
6 | 6.52% |
System Installed on time? | 92 |
85 | 92.39% |
2008 Survey Results |
Product: Polaris |
Response Distribution |
Statistics |
Category | Responses |
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
Mode | Mean | Median |
ILS Satisfaction | 51 |
| | | | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 21 | 16 | 8 | 7.73 | 8 |
ILS Functionality | 0 |
| | | | | | | | | | 0 | 0.00 | |
Print Functionality | 0 |
| | | | | | | | | | 0 | 0.00 | |
Electronic Functionality | 0 |
| | | | | | | | | | 0 | 0.00 | |
Company Satisfaction | 51 |
| | | | 4 | 3 | 2 | 5 | 15 | 22 | 9 | 7.76 | 8 |
Support Satisfaction | 51 |
1 | | | | 4 | 4 | 3 | 8 | 11 | 20 | 9 | 7.41 | 8 |
Support Improvement | 0 |
not applicable |
Company Loyalty | 52 |
3 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | | 3 | 14 | 25 | 9 | 7.33 | 8 |
Open Source Interest | 51 |
15 | 13 | 6 | 3 | 2 | 7 | 1 | 1 | | 3 | 0 | 2.29 | 1 |
Category | Total | Yes | percent |
Considering new ILS | 53 |
5 | 9.43% |
Considering new Interface | 53 |
3 | 5.66% |
System Installed on time? | 53 |
48 | 90.57% |
2007 Survey Results |
Product: Polaris |
Response Distribution |
Statistics |
Category | Responses |
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
Mode | Mean | Median |
ILS Satisfaction | 59 |
| | | 1 | 1 | 1 | 5 | 12 | 18 | 21 | 9 | 7.78 | 8 |
ILS Functionality | 0 |
| | | | | | | | | | 0 | 0.00 | |
Print Functionality | 0 |
| | | | | | | | | | 0 | 0.00 | |
Electronic Functionality | 0 |
| | | | | | | | | | 0 | 0.00 | |
Company Satisfaction | 64 |
| | | 1 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 11 | 20 | 26 | 9 | 7.89 | 8 |
Support Satisfaction | 64 |
| | | 1 | | 3 | 2 | 8 | 17 | 33 | 9 | 8.11 | 9 |
Support Improvement | 0 |
not applicable |
Company Loyalty | 63 |
| | 2 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 5 | 7 | 18 | 24 | 9 | 7.49 | 8 |
Open Source Interest | 62 |
20 | 11 | 11 | 3 | 5 | 4 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 2.27 | 2 |
Category | Total | Yes | percent |
Considering new ILS | 64 |
1 | 1.56% |
Considering new Interface | 64 |
2 | 3.13% |
System Installed on time? | 64 |
1 | 1.56% |
2022 : gen: 7.40 company 7.07 loyalty 6.88 support 7.06
2021 : gen: 7.57 company 7.18 loyalty 7.26 support 7.31
2020 : gen: 7.46 company 7.11 loyalty 7.10 support 7.31
2019 : gen: 7.41 company 6.75 loyalty 6.45 support 6.94
2018 : gen: 7.39 company 6.59 loyalty 6.52 support 6.94
2017 : gen: 7.25 company 6.71 loyalty 6.60 support 6.90
2016 : gen: 7.35 company 6.84 loyalty 6.75 support 6.96
2015 : gen: 7.24 company 6.67 loyalty 6.63 support 6.90
2014 : gen: 7.51 company 7.23 loyalty 7.11 support 7.36
2013 : gen: 7.63 company 7.70 loyalty 7.62 support 7.54
2012 : gen: 7.87 company 7.83 loyalty 7.97 support 7.52
2011 : gen: 7.77 company 7.80 loyalty 7.95 support 7.55
2010 : gen: 7.77 company 7.83 loyalty 7.92 support 7.74
2009 : gen: 7.79 company 7.80 loyalty 7.68 support 7.68
2008 : gen: 7.73 company 7.76 loyalty 7.33 support 7.41
2007 : gen: 7.78 company 7.89 loyalty 7.49 support 8.11
Comments (survey2020)
We continue to look/wait for an ILS with integrated patron engagement and customer relationship management functionality.
(Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 6)
Although this library would prefer an Open Source managerial program, the current ILS and it consortium, is financially tied to the current program it uses. A complete overhaul would not be financially possible at this time and
it does not seem to favor an Open Source program.
(Library type: Other; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 8)
We migrated from Millennium to Polaris starting in Sept 2019. The data migration went very well. Polaris was responsive, making sure our data transferred the way we wanted it to. We went live with Circulation in March 2020, 5 days before we shut down for COVID-19. Polaris was generous in giving us time to learn and use the system before we were transferred to general support. I was hoping general support would be better with Polaris as compared to Millennium, since with Polaris we are assigned a specific site manager to handle out tickets. I was disappointed to learn that Polaris support isn't any more responsive than Millennium was. But we love the features in Polaris so we are not disappointed that we migrated.
(Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 8)
Overall we are very happy with Polaris. As with any system there are minor UX issues that can be really annoying. Many could be easily rectified but they require a long process involving proposing it to the users group, voting on it, ranking the ideas and only implementing it after going through all this. How hard can it be to correct something that I can do with one click? To go through this whole process to, for instance, place the cursor back in a search box after a no-match is ridiculous.
(Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 7)
Our ILS is hosted by the vendor, and learned this year that their definition of 'uptime' is quite different from ours. They basically think that all they can be held accountable for is having their vm's running. If their API isn't functioning, that's not 'down-time'. Hopefully being bought by a larger company will help them have more realistic expectations for running a hosting service.
(Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 7)
We are CURRENTLY migrating to SirsiDynix Symphony but have NOT switched over yet. We had attempted to use EBSCO Discovery Service as a tool to provide federated searching with Polaris and our e-resources but that was a failed project.
(Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 6)
We are nearing the end of our contract and are doing our due diligence in looking at other options which might be more cost-effective and perhaps offer some features/capabilities we do not currently have.
(Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 6)
Polaris Library System has been a behemoth since day 1. It is much too complex to be efficient in the everyday uses of a public library. It is overly complex, the reports access requires input and reports about reports created by Illinois Heartland Library System, which is inefficient and out of the librarian's control. It was never the right product for this library system, either on the public service side or the governmental reports side.
(Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 5)
Our annual report has not been compiled for this fiscal year yet. The physical items in our building are listed as 143,395 but we have access to many thousands of digital/streaming items through Kanopy and other vendors. We used to load Hoopla and RBDigital records into the catalog but now only include 58,200 integrated OverDrive titles.
(Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 8)
We have just been frustrated with the lack of response with Polaris especially after the merger with III. We were looking at OCLCWise but they are so expensive and unless you are a huge system, it is not affordable. We were also looking at Koha through Bywater and keeping an eye on Folio even though they are geared more for academic libraries and not public.
(Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 7)
We do not and have not had any requests from any patrons for any outside resources. Most people Google things and only ask for navigating the web if necessary.
(Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 0)
ILS companies get a bad rap, but we make their lives hell with our nitpicking and indecisiveness. I've been on both sides of the table, and I know that most companies are trying their hardest to deliver good value for money.
(Library type: Public; collection size: large; ils satisfaction: 8)
We are a library system located in Georgia, one of the few systems not a part of the PINES state library consortium
(Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 8)
This las time this survey was filled, it was not done by any current employees here now. We have noted the number of our physical collections, the larger number that was previously reported perhaps included electronic items.
(Library type: Public; collection size: large; ils satisfaction: 7)
Granted Polaris has new owners, but there are times where we ask something and get “I don’t know why it’s doing that" or “unable to determine” as the response. We eliminate e-content from reports because the ILS cannot track usage accurately. "Integrated" e-content in the ILS would be great. Fortunately, we're able to get some e-content into the catalog, but still have to rely on the various vendors for usage data.
(Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 7)
Polaris customer support is amazing. Of all of the many vendors we work with, they are the most responsive and reliable, also we are able to build relationships with them instead of not knowing who we might get on the phone when we call with an emergency or question. Also they were very proactive about creating free resources to help libraries during the craziness of the pandemic shut down and immediately started working on ways to improve the ILS for future similar situations.
(Library type: Public; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 8)
All libraries share the centrally managed hosted ILS. The Collection Count includes all the holdings of the Library System, both physical and online. It does not include statewide databases and collections we also access.
(Library type: Public; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 9)
This library is a branch of the [...] . All libraries share the centrally managed hosted ILS.
This library was damaged by hurricanes and is closed except for temporary express library building providing limited services. The Collection Count includes all the holdings of the Library System we pay for, both physical and online. It does not include statewide databases and collections we also access.
(Library type: Public; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 9)
LEAP is great in many ways, but it doesn't have all the functionalities of the Polaris client and running very specialized searches isn't as convenient.
(Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 7)
[...]
(Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 8)
All of my assistance comes from [...] headquarters and they determine the products and support companies.
(Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)
[...] manages the ILS and we have no contact with Innovative or Polaris. Some issues we have might be due to preferences of the [...] and not the product itself.
(Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 3)
We are a school library that has to use the public library ILS since we are part of their consortium. Polaris is not made with school libraries in mind, and many of the things that I know Follett Destiny users can do (which seems to be the most popular ILS in school libraries), Polaris just doesn't have the capability.
(Library type: School; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 7)
[...] is a member of the [...] Consortium, comprised of 16 of the 20 public libraries in [...] . The consortium voted at their December 2020 meeting to contract with Polaris as follows: to authorize [..] to enter into a 3-year contract with iii for a 4-piece package, comprising SkyRiver, Inventory Manager, API, and the Rejuvenation Project.
(Library type: Public; collection size: large; ils satisfaction: 7)
We have a great system.
(Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)
Polaris enhancement requests rarely get implemented. Requests seem to enter a black hole once submitted. We are not given an opportunity to provide input/priorities re: future upgrades.
(Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 7)
We represent our data for the system so each of our branch answers will the same.
(Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 9)
While we are not currently considering migrating to a new automation system, we will be exploring the question if we should. While not mentioned above for open source ILS options, I will be monitoring the progress with Folio and I just recently heard of Tind, which on initial glance appears intriguing.
(Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 5)
2020 was rough for many people and companies, however, since the acquisition of Innovative Interfaced by ProQuest, I have seen movement toward improvements but not big improvements. Hoping to see more in 2021. Polaris has been a very good resource, but it could be enhanced to be able to use it with tablets and work as a web site. Polaris client is functional for acquisition, cataloging, serials, and database maintenance. I wish we can improve public online catalog searching and search results.
(Library type: Public; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 7)
Polaris is the only vendor that does ASN receiving, which is a huge plus for us. We'd like an ILS that incorporates more of the modern library needs, such as electronic resource management and book club kits.
(Library type: Public; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 5)