Library Technology Guides

Documents, Databases, News, and Commentary

Select another Product Report:

Statistical Report for Insignia

Statistics according to type and size categories

The following table presents the 2021 results according to the type and size of the library.

2021 Insignia Responses by Sector
InsigniaallAcademicPublicSchoolConsortium
smallmediumlargesmallmediumlarge
navgnavgnavgnavgnavgnavgnavgnavgnavg
SatisfactionLevelILS74.29 10000040
ILSFunctionality74.14 10000040
PrintFunctionality75.29 10000040
ElectronicFunctionality74.00 10000040
SatisfactionCustomerSupport74.14 10000040
CompanyLoyalty73.14 10000040



2021 Survey Results
Product: Insignia Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction7 1 4 1 1 34.293
ILS Functionality7 1 1 3 1 1 34.143
Print Functionality7 1 3 1 2 45.294
Electronic Functionality7 1 3 2 1 34.003
Company Satisfaction7 1 4 1 1 34.293
Support Satisfaction7 1 4 1 1 44.144
Support Improvement0 00.00
Company Loyalty7 4 1 1 1 03.140
Open Source Interest7 3 1 3 01.431

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS7 114.29%
Considering new Interface7 00.00%
System Installed on time?7 00.00%

Average Collection size: 272535

TypeCount
Public0
Academic1
School4
Consortium0
Special0

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



2020 Survey Results
Product: Insignia Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction10 2 1 1 1 4 1 86.108
ILS Functionality11 3 2 2 3 1 36.187
Print Functionality11 1 2 1 2 3 2 86.367
Electronic Functionality11 1 1 1 1 2 4 1 64.825
Company Satisfaction11 3 2 5 1 86.278
Support Satisfaction11 3 2 4 2 86.188
Support Improvement0 00.00
Company Loyalty11 2 1 1 1 4 2 85.828
Open Source Interest7 2 2 1 1 1 01.861

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS11 00.00%
Considering new Interface11 00.00%
System Installed on time?11 00.00%

Average Collection size: 224211

TypeCount
Public5
Academic2
School2
Consortium0
Special1

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,0001
[2] 10,001-100,0006
[3] 100,001-250,0000
[4] 250,001-1,000,0002
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,0001
[6] over 10,000,0010



2019 Survey Results
Product: Insignia Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction7 1 4 1 1 76.867
ILS Functionality7 1 2 3 1 76.437
Print Functionality7 1 1 3 1 1 76.437
Electronic Functionality7 1 2 1 2 1 35.146
Company Satisfaction7 1 3 2 1 77.007
Support Satisfaction7 1 1 2 2 1 77.147
Support Improvement7 2 2 2 1 56.436
Company Loyalty7 1 2 2 2 77.008
Open Source Interest7 3 2 1 1 01.711

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS7 00.00%
Considering new Interface7 00.00%
System Installed on time?7 685.71%

Average Collection size: 285139

TypeCount
Public4
Academic1
School2
Consortium0
Special0

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


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
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction6 2 1 1 2 25.838
ILS Functionality6 1 1 1 1 2 96.178
Print Functionality6 1 1 1 3 86.838
Electronic Functionality6 2 1 1 1 1 45.676
Company Satisfaction6 1 1 1 1 2 95.507
Support Satisfaction6 1 1 2 2 86.678
Support Improvement6 1 1 1 2 1 85.838
Company Loyalty6 2 1 1 2 04.505
Open Source Interest6 1 1 2 1 1 33.173

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS6 00.00%
Considering new Interface6 00.00%
System Installed on time?6 583.33%

Average Collection size: 32561

TypeCount
Public5
Academic1
School0
Consortium0
Special0

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


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

2021 : gen: 4.29 company 4.29 loyalty 3.14 support 4.14

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 (survey2021)

Overall, I am not satisfied with Insignia. It is a basic opac, but it doesn't appear to me to satisfy an American definition of discovery layer. The Insignia is also based on the idea of libraries using Dewey. Their reports often do not have LC as an option in the reports module. The Insignia reports assumes that everyone's books date post-1900. It cannot count the number of books any library has that were published prior to 1900. [...] idea is that we educate users to embrace the Insignia experience. but we can't do that. We cannot market their database. Most of these soldiers/students come from a robust university environment and they used discovery layers 1-10 years ago at a university. Even the local community colleges or small private colleges often have Alma/Primo, or at least a more robust Summon, or an EBSCO discovery layer. Insignia is marketed for a K-12 environment. Additionally, when it comes to self-check machines, Insignia does not have location codes that allow the library to gather statistics on its checkouts by SIP. IN a consortia environment all the SIP checkouts are checked out to a generic "US Army" library not to my library. So I cannot even run a report in Insignia that shows any circulation from the self-checkouts. It also has no way to run an overdue report on SIP checkouts. I would say that Insignia simply does not meet basic standards in a 21st century library. (Library type: Academic; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 1)

While we are aware of the implications that COVID has had overall, we are experiencing increased frustration with the delayed vendor response for support. For example, ticket opened a year ago and still waiting for resolution from vendor. The vendor is responsive to having a Provincially-based User Group for Ontario customers. We like the changes that the vendor has made to the ILS and Library Catalogue interfaces/functionality. (Library type: School; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 8)

ILS