Library Technology Guides

Documents, Databases, News, and Commentary

Select another Product Report:

Statistical Report for VERSO

Statistics according to type and size categories

The following table presents the 2020 results according to the type and size of the library.

2020 VERSO Responses by Sector
VERSOallAcademicPublicSchoolConsortium
smallmediumlargesmallmediumlarge
navgnavgnavgnavgnavgnavgnavgnavgnavg
SatisfactionLevelILS1497.07 116.55001177.201035
ILSFunctionality1497.12 117.18001177.201035
PrintFunctionality1477.37 118.09001157.361035
ElectronicFunctionality1386.32 105.10001096.501024
SatisfactionCustomerSupport1487.61 117.82001167.601035
CompanyLoyalty1466.97 117.36001156.961034



2020 Survey Results
Product: VERSO Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction149 1 2 1 4 5 9 15 41 44 27 87.077
ILS Functionality149 1 2 2 9 10 15 33 50 27 87.128
Print Functionality147 1 1 3 6 11 9 29 48 39 87.378
Electronic Functionality138 10 6 1 9 11 17 30 32 22 86.327
Company Satisfaction148 2 3 5 5 14 35 46 38 87.418
Support Satisfaction148 2 2 5 8 13 19 46 53 97.618
Support Improvement0 00.00
Company Loyalty146 2 2 3 4 8 13 10 31 34 39 96.978
Open Source Interest127 28 8 13 12 9 33 6 6 6 4 53.574

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS153 159.80%
Considering new Interface153 21.31%
System Installed on time?153 00.00%

Average Collection size: 170272

TypeCount
Public122
Academic14
School3
Consortium5
Special3

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,00021
[2] 10,001-100,000116
[3] 100,001-250,0003
[4] 250,001-1,000,0005
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,0000
[6] over 10,000,0011



2019 Survey Results
Product: VERSO Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction48 5 3 3 4 3 13 11 6 76.297
ILS Functionality48 1 4 3 1 9 11 10 9 76.737
Print Functionality48 1 1 5 2 3 3 8 15 10 86.758
Electronic Functionality48 3 3 2 6 4 7 5 10 8 85.886
Company Satisfaction47 2 3 1 2 2 2 7 16 12 86.948
Support Satisfaction48 2 2 1 1 3 3 16 20 97.508
Support Improvement48 3 1 2 4 12 5 3 9 9 56.006
Company Loyalty47 3 1 2 2 5 2 3 8 7 14 96.327
Open Source Interest48 16 6 2 1 8 8 2 1 1 3 02.903

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS49 714.29%
Considering new Interface49 48.16%
System Installed on time?49 4489.80%

Average Collection size: 35051

TypeCount
Public36
Academic9
School0
Consortium2
Special2

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,0006
[2] 10,001-100,00040
[3] 100,001-250,0001
[4] 250,001-1,000,0001
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,0000
[6] over 10,000,0010



2018 Survey Results
Product: VERSO Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction145 1 1 4 4 9 12 36 49 29 87.268
ILS Functionality145 2 3 4 6 15 36 51 28 87.308
Print Functionality143 1 1 4 8 11 37 51 30 87.448
Electronic Functionality136 7 2 7 6 15 16 25 44 14 86.427
Company Satisfaction144 1 2 1 3 3 7 9 28 52 38 87.428
Support Satisfaction144 1 2 1 1 3 2 10 19 49 56 97.768
Support Improvement137 1 1 1 5 30 8 29 31 31 86.947
Company Loyalty142 4 4 4 3 8 12 10 28 31 38 96.757
Open Source Interest143 48 15 10 11 20 24 6 3 5 1 02.622

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS148 85.41%
Considering new Interface148 53.38%
System Installed on time?148 13893.24%

Average Collection size: 35763

TypeCount
Public124
Academic15
School2
Consortium3
Special1

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,00018
[2] 10,001-100,000117
[3] 100,001-250,0007
[4] 250,001-1,000,0000
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,0000
[6] over 10,000,0010



2017 Survey Results
Product: VERSO Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction132 1 2 4 4 5 21 23 45 27 87.178
ILS Functionality132 4 4 4 9 20 24 43 24 87.048
Print Functionality127 1 2 1 5 8 14 24 49 23 87.248
Electronic Functionality127 2 1 2 4 14 18 17 15 35 19 86.467
Company Satisfaction130 2 1 2 3 8 9 27 37 41 97.428
Support Satisfaction132 1 1 4 5 11 21 37 52 97.738
Support Improvement128 2 4 24 11 14 31 42 97.238
Company Loyalty126 3 1 2 7 7 17 21 33 35 97.138
Open Source Interest127 48 13 14 8 15 14 7 4 3 1 02.352

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS133 129.02%
Considering new Interface133 21.50%
System Installed on time?133 12190.98%

Average Collection size: 58743

TypeCount
Public111
Academic14
School0
Consortium4
Special2

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,00018
[2] 10,001-100,000100
[3] 100,001-250,0007
[4] 250,001-1,000,0003
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,0001
[6] over 10,000,0010



2016 Survey Results
Product: VERSO Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction89 3 2 3 8 10 27 25 11 76.887
ILS Functionality88 1 3 4 10 12 15 35 8 86.897
Print Functionality87 1 1 2 3 6 11 25 25 13 76.997
Electronic Functionality75 3 2 2 3 6 8 9 18 14 10 76.157
Company Satisfaction88 1 2 4 5 10 13 37 16 87.278
Support Satisfaction87 1 1 6 8 13 32 26 87.628
Support Improvement86 1 7 12 11 24 15 16 76.847
Company Loyalty88 4 2 4 8 9 17 28 16 86.818
Open Source Interest85 24 10 22 6 6 7 5 3 2 02.332

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS90 44.44%
Considering new Interface90 22.22%
System Installed on time?90 8392.22%

Average Collection size: 39853

TypeCount
Public77
Academic11
School0
Consortium1
Special0

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,00014
[2] 10,001-100,00069
[3] 100,001-250,0004
[4] 250,001-1,000,0001
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,0000
[6] over 10,000,0010



2015 Survey Results
Product: VERSO Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction131 2 2 6 15 15 37 36 18 76.937
ILS Functionality130 2 2 7 13 16 45 32 13 76.827
Print Functionality128 1 1 1 8 2 15 42 43 15 87.117
Electronic Functionality108 1 1 3 6 7 8 14 32 25 11 76.487
Company Satisfaction130 1 1 2 2 11 10 39 41 23 87.227
Support Satisfaction130 1 2 4 3 12 28 40 40 87.588
Support Improvement125 1 7 35 10 18 30 24 56.777
Company Loyalty127 6 3 8 15 20 25 28 22 86.567
Open Source Interest122 36 9 24 6 16 15 5 6 4 1 02.682

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS136 128.82%
Considering new Interface136 32.21%
System Installed on time?136 12591.91%

Average Collection size: 38377

TypeCount
Public119
Academic12
School0
Consortium2
Special1

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,00017
[2] 10,001-100,000106
[3] 100,001-250,0008
[4] 250,001-1,000,0001
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,0000
[6] over 10,000,0010



2014 Survey Results
Product: VERSO Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction53 2 2 2 2 7 8 11 11 8 76.267
ILS Functionality54 1 4 2 1 5 6 9 19 7 86.637
Print Functionality55 1 1 2 6 4 6 18 12 5 76.477
Electronic Functionality47 3 1 3 1 7 9 4 10 5 4 75.385
Company Satisfaction54 2 3 2 3 9 18 10 7 76.567
Support Satisfaction55 1 2 1 1 1 3 4 10 21 11 87.048
Support Improvement53 3 2 1 2 11 1 8 18 7 86.457
Company Loyalty54 4 1 2 2 3 2 9 2 17 12 86.398
Open Source Interest52 14 6 12 1 9 5 3 1 1 02.482

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS58 813.79%
Considering new Interface58 46.90%
System Installed on time?58 5594.83%

Average Collection size: 47480

TypeCount
Public49
Academic7
School0
Consortium1
Special0

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,0008
[2] 10,001-100,00042
[3] 100,001-250,0006
[4] 250,001-1,000,0001
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,0000
[6] over 10,000,0010



2013 Survey Results
Product: VERSO Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction68 5 2 2 6 4 18 19 12 86.627
ILS Functionality68 3 1 1 5 6 4 19 18 11 76.687
Print Functionality68 4 2 1 1 1 2 6 14 22 15 86.858
Electronic Functionality63 3 2 2 3 6 7 6 13 11 10 76.027
Company Satisfaction68 5 1 1 1 1 4 3 16 15 21 96.908
Support Satisfaction68 4 1 3 1 3 2 11 17 26 97.198
Support Improvement64 4 7 18 2 11 8 14 56.207
Company Loyalty67 5 3 2 2 4 4 5 12 12 18 96.287
Open Source Interest66 24 11 5 1 7 10 3 4 1 02.381

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS69 710.14%
Considering new Interface69 22.90%
System Installed on time?69 6695.65%

Average Collection size: 42434

TypeCount
Public58
Academic8
School1
Consortium0
Special1

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,0004
[2] 10,001-100,00057
[3] 100,001-250,0006
[4] 250,001-1,000,0000
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,0000
[6] over 10,000,0010



2012 Survey Results
Product: VERSO Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction74 2 1 3 1 5 15 31 16 87.328
ILS Functionality76 2 3 3 2 1 4 18 29 14 87.058
Print Functionality0 00.00
Electronic Functionality0 00.00
Company Satisfaction76 1 1 1 1 1 4 15 24 28 97.688
Support Satisfaction76 1 1 3 1 4 11 18 37 97.808
Support Improvement75 1 1 2 9 14 3 7 16 22 96.768
Company Loyalty76 5 1 1 2 4 4 8 22 29 97.248
Open Source Interest70 22 8 14 4 7 7 5 3 02.312

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS79 67.59%
Considering new Interface79 33.80%
System Installed on time?79 7189.87%

Average Collection size: 64695

TypeCount
Public61
Academic14
School1
Consortium1
Special1

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,0009
[2] 10,001-100,00063
[3] 100,001-250,0003
[4] 250,001-1,000,0001
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,0001
[6] over 10,000,0010



2011 Survey Results
Product: VERSO Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction67 1 1 2 6 12 21 24 97.728
ILS Functionality67 2 3 7 16 22 17 87.498
Print Functionality0 00.00
Electronic Functionality0 00.00
Company Satisfaction67 1 1 7 5 23 30 98.048
Support Satisfaction67 1 1 1 2 1 19 42 98.349
Support Improvement66 1 1 9 8 5 13 29 97.538
Company Loyalty66 2 1 1 3 3 8 18 30 97.708
Open Source Interest66 18 12 7 4 9 8 4 3 1 02.592

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS67 34.48%
Considering new Interface67 00.00%
System Installed on time?67 6597.01%

Average Collection size: 40971

TypeCount
Public50
Academic13
School2
Consortium0
Special1

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,0006
[2] 10,001-100,00056
[3] 100,001-250,0004
[4] 250,001-1,000,0000
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,0000
[6] over 10,000,0010



2010 Survey Results
Product: VERSO Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction72 1 1 3 7 27 17 16 77.407
ILS Functionality0 00.00
Print Functionality0 00.00
Electronic Functionality0 00.00
Company Satisfaction72 5 4 19 16 28 97.818
Support Satisfaction72 1 2 3 19 12 35 97.998
Support Improvement71 16 15 4 5 8 23 96.617
Company Loyalty72 3 5 2 5 24 33 97.968
Open Source Interest71 20 7 20 6 2 11 4 1 02.242

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS73 45.48%
Considering new Interface73 00.00%
System Installed on time?73 7197.26%

Average Collection size: 31725

TypeCount
Public59
Academic11
School1
Consortium0
Special1

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,0006
[2] 10,001-100,00059
[3] 100,001-250,0002
[4] 250,001-1,000,0000
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,0000
[6] over 10,000,0010



2009 Survey Results
Product: VERSO Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction71 1 1 5 16 27 21 87.838
ILS Functionality0 00.00
Print Functionality0 00.00
Electronic Functionality0 00.00
Company Satisfaction71 1 2 2 5 19 42 98.319
Support Satisfaction70 1 1 1 8 15 44 98.349
Support Improvement64 2 7 2 10 10 33 97.759
Company Loyalty71 1 1 1 9 9 50 98.459
Open Source Interest71 29 9 12 1 5 8 2 3 1 1 02.061

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS72 11.39%
Considering new Interface72 11.39%
System Installed on time?72 6894.44%





2008 Survey Results
Product: VERSO Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction81 2 1 1 2 3 4 2 17 25 24 87.268
ILS Functionality0 00.00
Print Functionality0 00.00
Electronic Functionality0 00.00
Company Satisfaction81 2 2 3 3 2 12 20 37 97.688
Support Satisfaction81 2 1 2 1 2 3 11 15 44 97.819
Support Improvement0 not applicable
Company Loyalty81 3 2 4 3 10 18 41 97.639
Open Source Interest81 30 6 6 8 8 11 5 4 1 2 02.632

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS83 44.82%
Considering new Interface83 00.00%
System Installed on time?83 8096.39%





2007 Survey Results
Product: VERSO Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction18 1 2 2 5 5 3 76.897
ILS Functionality0 00.00
Print Functionality0 00.00
Electronic Functionality0 00.00
Company Satisfaction24 1 1 1 1 5 8 7 87.338
Support Satisfaction24 1 1 1 1 4 8 8 87.468
Support Improvement0 not applicable
Company Loyalty24 3 2 1 3 8 7 86.588
Open Source Interest24 7 2 1 3 3 4 2 1 1 03.083

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS24 416.67%
Considering new Interface24 14.17%
System Installed on time?24 14.17%




2020 : gen: 7.07 company 7.41 loyalty 6.97 support 7.61

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 (survey2020)

For our library to consider an open source ILS we would need tech support from an outside vendor or consortium arrangement. (Library type: Academic; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 7)

I did not answer the question How effective is this product in managing your library's electronic resources? because we do not use Verso to mange our electronic resources. An n/a option would have been helpful here. Thanks (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 6)

VERSO is not a bad product, it is just not intended for an academic setting. There is no SSO, databases are clunky to access, and it creates more work than it solves in the long run. We are very interested in Alma, but concerned about costs and transparency. (Library type: Academic; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 3)

VERSO does not allow a MARC record export for print records of only a certain type, you have to download all print records then weed out the ones you don't want included. For example, when updating the discovery service, we want our print materials but we don't want those that are ILL, reserve, marked as equipment, etc. I have asked Auto-Graphics about this and they said they have added it to a future update. (Library type: Academic; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 7)

Specific decisions about products are made in [...] at our main campus. (Library type: Academic; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 7)

While customer service has always been very good from the representatives at Autographics, the system as an ILS is not intuitive, especially for staff who have never worked in a library before. (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 3)

Not sure what open source ILS is referring too. (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 8)

We are working with Auto Graphics to provide a Discovery Service in the near future. (Library type: Academic; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 8)

The customer service with Verso is outstanding. Any time we have had issues with the system, they have been able to help us solve the problem either directly, or by figuring out the bug that has caused the issue. They are very good at listening to what problems we are having and working through problem solving with us. (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 7)

Verso works well for our library. However, because the state of [...] no longer provides a workable statewide ILL system, we may be forced to join a consortium within the next several years. (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 8)

I don't know what an open source ILS is. (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)

Our current system has been in place since we first automated. We have discussed migrating to a new service, but the costs involved are daunting. VERSO works, it is just a little clunky/clumsy to use in some spots. (Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 7)

We were much more pleased with VERSO prior to their big "update" in 2019? Since then it has been one issue after another to be fixed. It was explained the "update" was to make it more friendly for devices such as cellphones, but I have a difficult time navigating VERSO on my cell phone, and I am familiar with it. A regular patron would have a much more difficult time. Also the searching since the update is horrid. And as in every version of VERSO I have used in the past 7 years, it requires way too many clicks to get where you want to go. (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 6)

We try to attend any of the information or training sessions available to us that we think would be relevant. Sometimes I feel that the presenter doesn't go as in-depth as I would like. It tends to go off topic. (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 4)

I was recently hired to fill the vacancy resulting from the previous director's resignation. My previous experience with an ILS was through our local school system. I have no experience with our ILS system prior to August of 2020, so I have no impressions to impart other than finding some of the tutorials helpful while learning to navigate through VERSO. (Library type: Public; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 8)

It's very difficult to customize Verso for our needs, when we ask for help, we don't get it in a prompt or meaningful manner. It seems like there are so many things we could do with Verso, but we don't have the power to make changes. I've repeatedly asked for in-person help and not received it. (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 4)

There are aspects of Verso that we love, but some of simple tasks it is not able to do as well as the system we migrated from. Our old system allowed to jump from patron to patron much easier than Verso, and this is still something that we greatly miss. (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 7)

i wish you could look up an item by format in your library collection (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 8)

[...] is not a library, per se, but serves as the administrator for the ILS that is shared by its member public libraries. [...] seeks to handle as many ILS support questions from its members as possible. That said, the customer service provided by Auto-Graphics has been exceptional for many years, in response to [...] -originated help requests and also those originating from member libraries. Support/responsiveness and cost are two primary pros for the Auto-Graphics Verso ILS. Separately, because we administer the ILS for a group of libraries, the "number of items in the library's collection" reported above is for all the library members of [...] that share in the Verso ILS, not for [...] ' own single collection. (Library type: Consortium; collection size: large; ils satisfaction: 9)

This is a branch of the main library. The holdings are rotated between the main library and 4 branches. (Library type: Public; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 7)

The Vendor has always been open to suggestions for improvement and to grow with the technology needs of our libraries. (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 8)

ILS