Library Technology Guides

Documents, Databases, News, and Commentary

Select another Product Report:

Statistical Report for WorldShare Management Services

Statistics according to type and size categories

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

2020 WorldShare Management Services Responses by Sector
WorldShare Management ServicesallAcademicPublicSchoolConsortium
smallmediumlargesmallmediumlarge
navgnavgnavgnavgnavgnavgnavgnavgnavg
SatisfactionLevelILS1127.09 407.25337.2486.7520031
ILSFunctionality1117.22 407.33337.3686.2520031
PrintFunctionality1127.60 407.70337.6787.3820031
ElectronicFunctionality1117.04 407.33337.0086.7520031
SatisfactionCustomerSupport1117.29 407.53327.4487.7520031
CompanyLoyalty1116.99 407.22327.1386.6320031



2020 Survey Results
Product: WorldShare Management Services Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction112 2 2 2 4 19 41 23 19 77.097
ILS Functionality111 1 2 10 15 31 35 17 87.227
Print Functionality112 1 1 3 9 31 44 23 87.608
Electronic Functionality111 1 2 4 2 3 20 28 34 17 87.047
Company Satisfaction112 3 2 2 3 5 7 31 35 24 87.198
Support Satisfaction111 1 2 1 2 2 4 10 26 38 25 87.298
Support Improvement0 00.00
Company Loyalty111 5 1 2 2 3 8 7 24 28 31 96.998
Open Source Interest110 32 14 16 7 8 8 5 12 2 5 02.952

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS114 1210.53%
Considering new Interface114 108.77%
System Installed on time?114 00.00%

Average Collection size: 444751

TypeCount
Public2
Academic87
School3
Consortium1
Special2

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,0001
[2] 10,001-100,00035
[3] 100,001-250,00023
[4] 250,001-1,000,00040
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,0009
[6] over 10,000,0010



2019 Survey Results
Product: WorldShare Management Services Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction155 2 5 6 9 30 52 34 17 76.827
ILS Functionality153 2 8 5 10 31 46 33 18 76.757
Print Functionality155 2 4 5 13 19 39 44 29 87.107
Electronic Functionality154 4 4 2 22 31 31 42 18 86.757
Company Satisfaction155 1 3 6 7 4 18 43 49 24 87.037
Support Satisfaction155 1 2 3 6 4 6 20 32 47 34 87.088
Support Improvement153 2 5 13 40 19 32 25 17 56.296
Company Loyalty152 5 4 5 3 6 12 12 28 39 38 86.778
Open Source Interest153 48 19 24 10 17 14 6 8 3 4 02.532

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS156 74.49%
Considering new Interface156 106.41%
System Installed on time?156 14492.31%

Average Collection size: 417961

TypeCount
Public6
Academic121
School3
Consortium1
Special9

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,0005
[2] 10,001-100,00056
[3] 100,001-250,00038
[4] 250,001-1,000,00039
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,00013
[6] over 10,000,0010



2018 Survey Results
Product: WorldShare Management Services Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction109 2 3 1 6 9 21 36 22 9 76.567
ILS Functionality109 1 1 1 2 7 14 22 29 20 12 76.517
Print Functionality109 2 1 2 2 6 19 24 33 20 87.107
Electronic Functionality109 2 4 2 7 9 18 37 19 11 76.497
Company Satisfaction107 1 2 4 5 8 13 29 29 16 76.837
Support Satisfaction106 2 1 4 7 8 15 31 24 14 76.697
Support Improvement106 1 1 3 17 32 11 18 16 7 55.885
Company Loyalty107 3 3 4 3 7 11 12 19 23 22 86.457
Open Source Interest108 33 18 14 7 7 14 6 4 3 2 02.512

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS109 1110.09%
Considering new Interface109 98.26%
System Installed on time?109 10495.41%

Average Collection size: 384087

TypeCount
Public4
Academic83
School0
Consortium1
Special5

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,0002
[2] 10,001-100,00040
[3] 100,001-250,00029
[4] 250,001-1,000,00027
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,0009
[6] over 10,000,0010



2017 Survey Results
Product: WorldShare Management Services Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction140 2 1 2 3 6 12 34 45 23 12 76.497
ILS Functionality140 2 1 3 4 4 18 25 38 36 9 76.507
Print Functionality138 1 2 4 6 12 11 34 42 26 87.067
Electronic Functionality137 2 1 4 2 9 10 27 38 30 14 76.537
Company Satisfaction139 2 1 2 3 3 14 26 36 28 24 76.797
Support Satisfaction140 3 1 3 3 2 15 23 35 33 22 76.747
Support Improvement137 4 2 4 16 32 24 18 23 14 55.996
Company Loyalty136 6 3 4 5 3 19 12 26 26 32 96.497
Open Source Interest139 54 18 21 10 10 13 3 2 2 6 02.141

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS142 107.04%
Considering new Interface142 96.34%
System Installed on time?142 12789.44%

Average Collection size: 367340

TypeCount
Public4
Academic111
School2
Consortium2
Special5

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,0002
[2] 10,001-100,00049
[3] 100,001-250,00034
[4] 250,001-1,000,00043
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,00010
[6] over 10,000,0010



2016 Survey Results
Product: WorldShare Management Services Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction133 2 1 3 5 4 9 20 40 33 16 76.707
ILS Functionality133 1 2 4 5 5 11 18 43 34 10 76.557
Print Functionality134 1 2 1 1 8 20 30 50 21 87.258
Electronic Functionality132 3 2 2 7 6 12 18 35 38 9 86.437
Company Satisfaction134 1 5 3 4 7 20 25 43 26 87.048
Support Satisfaction133 1 2 5 2 3 7 17 29 43 24 86.998
Support Improvement127 2 1 6 7 29 11 17 23 31 96.617
Company Loyalty132 7 2 4 1 4 13 7 19 32 43 96.918
Open Source Interest131 55 24 21 6 4 8 7 2 1 3 01.761

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS134 85.97%
Considering new Interface134 85.97%
System Installed on time?134 12694.03%

Average Collection size: 352782

TypeCount
Public4
Academic102
School1
Consortium1
Special5

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,0000
[2] 10,001-100,00049
[3] 100,001-250,00034
[4] 250,001-1,000,00039
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,0008
[6] over 10,000,0010



2015 Survey Results
Product: WorldShare Management Services Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction94 2 1 2 10 12 28 30 9 86.947
ILS Functionality94 2 2 3 7 9 19 23 20 9 76.437
Print Functionality94 2 1 8 14 24 29 16 87.177
Electronic Functionality93 3 1 1 6 11 15 20 29 7 86.587
Company Satisfaction94 2 1 3 3 12 20 34 19 87.318
Support Satisfaction93 3 1 6 3 14 17 31 18 87.088
Support Improvement89 1 2 9 18 14 16 14 15 56.427
Company Loyalty92 2 1 1 4 5 4 6 17 22 30 97.138
Open Source Interest92 45 17 14 2 1 5 3 2 3 01.511

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS95 33.16%
Considering new Interface95 44.21%
System Installed on time?95 8993.68%

Average Collection size: 424304

TypeCount
Public2
Academic75
School1
Consortium1
Special3

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,0003
[2] 10,001-100,00024
[3] 100,001-250,00031
[4] 250,001-1,000,00022
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,00010
[6] over 10,000,0010



2014 Survey Results
Product: WorldShare Management Services Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction72 1 1 2 1 3 10 28 22 4 76.887
ILS Functionality71 1 2 3 8 12 31 11 3 76.517
Print Functionality70 1 1 1 4 8 15 33 7 87.218
Electronic Functionality70 1 1 1 7 10 20 23 7 86.937
Company Satisfaction71 1 2 1 1 6 15 34 11 87.398
Support Satisfaction71 2 1 3 8 19 18 20 97.448
Support Improvement69 2 2 13 9 14 17 12 86.867
Company Loyalty73 1 1 1 2 1 4 15 23 25 97.598
Open Source Interest71 36 15 3 9 4 1 2 1 01.280

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS74 34.05%
Considering new Interface74 68.11%
System Installed on time?74 6689.19%

Average Collection size: 444490

TypeCount
Public4
Academic56
School1
Consortium1
Special3

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,0001
[2] 10,001-100,00024
[3] 100,001-250,00018
[4] 250,001-1,000,00013
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,0008
[6] over 10,000,0010



2013 Survey Results
Product: WorldShare Management Services Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction31 2 1 5 2 10 6 5 76.777
ILS Functionality31 3 3 2 4 5 8 3 3 75.816
Print Functionality30 1 1 2 4 2 6 8 6 86.807
Electronic Functionality31 1 2 4 2 1 7 8 6 86.687
Company Satisfaction30 1 5 3 3 8 10 97.378
Support Satisfaction31 1 1 4 4 7 7 7 77.007
Support Improvement31 1 10 3 4 7 6 56.777
Company Loyalty30 1 1 1 4 1 2 7 13 97.338
Open Source Interest30 15 3 1 4 2 4 1 01.701

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS32 13.13%
Considering new Interface32 13.13%
System Installed on time?32 2475.00%

Average Collection size: 260399

TypeCount
Public2
Academic25
School1
Consortium0
Special3

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,0003
[2] 10,001-100,0005
[3] 100,001-250,00013
[4] 250,001-1,000,0006
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,0002
[6] over 10,000,0010



2012 Survey Results
Product: WorldShare Management Services Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction21 1 1 2 1 2 7 6 1 76.387
ILS Functionality21 2 2 1 4 4 5 1 2 75.486
Print Functionality0 00.00
Electronic Functionality0 00.00
Company Satisfaction21 2 1 1 1 1 2 8 5 86.768
Support Satisfaction21 2 3 1 1 4 3 7 96.627
Support Improvement20 1 1 2 2 1 5 2 6 96.707
Company Loyalty21 2 1 1 4 5 8 96.958
Open Source Interest21 4 6 3 2 1 3 1 1 12.522

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS22 00.00%
Considering new Interface22 00.00%
System Installed on time?22 1777.27%

Average Collection size: 316875

TypeCount
Public0
Academic21
School0
Consortium0
Special0

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,0000
[2] 10,001-100,0006
[3] 100,001-250,0009
[4] 250,001-1,000,0004
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,0001
[6] over 10,000,0010



2011 Survey Results
Product: WorldShare Management Services Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction10 2 4 3 1 77.107
ILS Functionality10 1 1 2 2 3 1 75.205
Print Functionality0 00.00
Electronic Functionality0 00.00
Company Satisfaction10 1 2 1 6 98.209
Support Satisfaction10 1 1 3 5 98.209
Support Improvement9 2 1 2 4 97.568
Company Loyalty10 1 1 3 5 98.009
Open Source Interest10 5 3 2 00.701

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS10 00.00%
Considering new Interface10 00.00%
System Installed on time?10 990.00%

Average Collection size: 392232

TypeCount
Public0
Academic9
School0
Consortium0
Special1

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,0000
[2] 10,001-100,0002
[3] 100,001-250,0003
[4] 250,001-1,000,0002
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,0001
[6] over 10,000,0010


0 Responses for WorldShare Management Services in 2010

0 Responses for WorldShare Management Services in 2009

0 Responses for WorldShare Management Services in 2008

0 Responses for WorldShare Management Services in 2007

2020 : gen: 7.09 company 7.19 loyalty 6.99 support 7.29

2019 : gen: 6.82 company 7.03 loyalty 6.77 support 7.08

2018 : gen: 6.56 company 6.83 loyalty 6.45 support 6.69

2017 : gen: 6.49 company 6.79 loyalty 6.49 support 6.74

2016 : gen: 6.70 company 7.04 loyalty 6.91 support 6.99

2015 : gen: 6.94 company 7.31 loyalty 7.13 support 7.08

2014 : gen: 6.88 company 7.39 loyalty 7.59 support 7.44

2013 : gen: 6.77 company 7.37 loyalty 7.33 support 7.00

2012 : gen: 6.38 company 6.76 loyalty 6.95 support 6.62

2011 : gen: 7.10 company 8.20 loyalty 8.00 support 8.20

Comments (survey2020)

Why do this? The costs are not less if you consider you have to run it yourself or pay someone to run it for you. Why not just have a full-fledged product not dependent on the whim of others for development? (Library type: Academic; collection size: large; ils satisfaction: 8)

While the discovery service and ILS are generally good from an end-user point of view (and certainly fit for purpose), we look forward to the promised improvements to the admin side, which by the providers' own admission is very dated now, and not particularly intuitive or user-friendly. (Library type: Academic; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 7)

previous ILS was open source, but it was an island on its own working around OCLC products. it would not be out of the question but it would not happen for a long time since we just went live with WMS this year. (Library type: Academic; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 8)

Limited staffing (Library type: Academic; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 8)

Our only problem with the WMS system is the fact we did not purchase the report designer module. It was not yet available when we migrated to the system; and, we still have not had the necessary funds to purchase it. (Library type: Academic; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 7)

The only thing missing from our current system is the ability to "shelf browse" electronic and print books concurrently. They have a print book shelf browse function. (Library type: Government Agency; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)

Everything works great, the only issue is a common "broken link" issue for sources we should have access to. (Library type: Academic; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 7)

As a medium-sized academic library, there is no realistic path forward in open source implementation outside of a consortium model that does not exist currently in our context. We can never justify the payroll costs of attracting and retaining skilled open source implementers or developers locally against our other budget priorities, especially as e-collections costs continue to skyrocket in comparison to our fixed or lowered funding. (Library type: Academic; collection size: large; ils satisfaction: 6)

We are just completing the migration to WMS and WorldCat Discovery, so any impressions are very new. (Library type: Theology; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 8)

We do not have the IT resources to support an open source solution (Library type: Museum; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 8)

Worldshare Management Services could be an excellent LMS but continues to suffer due to OCLC continued expansion into other ventures which leaves less (much needed) development time for WMS. WMS has been on the market for over a decade and is only now receiving updates that allow it to handle bulk edits of items (in small batches). It is also suffers from server inconsistencies which often leads to outages (some times once or twice a week multiple weeks in a row). With the advent of Folio and Ex Libris's continued major iterative updates of Alma, WMS is beginning to feel like a flagship platform from a decade ago, and not the platform it needs to be for continued competition in the shrinking ILS/LSP market. (Library type: Academic; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 3)

It is quite possible that in the future we will switch to something else. Possibly AI will play a big role in making resources accessible. We are exploring the possibilities (Library type: Academic; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 7)

We generally like OCLC, but WMS still leaves a lot to be desired with searching and basic functions like ILL in the Discovery interface, which have been disappointing. They also charge a lot for add-on services that would possibly solve the problem; that is something I expect of proprietary vendors, and I find it disappointing in a non-profit. (Library type: Academic; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 7)

WorldShare Management Services does not adequately cater to the needs of a public library. Enhancement requests are largely ignored or denied. Customer support seem reluctant to escalate technical issues. Lack of customisability frequently results in increased manual labour for staff. (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 5)

ILS