Library Technology Guides

Documents, Databases, News, and Commentary

Select another Product Report:

Statistical Report for Symphony

2022 Survey Results
Product: Symphony		Response Distribution										Statistics
Category	Responses	0	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	Mode	Mean	Median
ILS Satisfaction	303	3	9	11	3	15	15	26	97	87	37	7	6.73	7
ILS Functionality	304	2	4	6	6	15	17	41	95	77	41	7	6.83	7
Print Functionality	302	2	3	3	5	5	15	20	76	109	64	8	7.35	8
Electronic Functionality	300	17	11	12	15	19	38	45	63	42	38	7	5.78	6
Company Satisfaction	299	4	3	5	9	13	18	26	76	85	60	8	6.99	7
Support Satisfaction	303	6	2	3	5	7	13	19	68	87	93	9	7.39	8
Support Improvement	0											0	0.00
Company Loyalty	298	24	10	4	6	7	23	18	62	74	70	8	6.52	7
Open Source Interest	283	71	23	23	28	12	43	21	24	19	13	0	3.67	3

Category	Total	Yes	percent
Considering new ILS	319	66	20.69%
Considering new Interface	319	15	4.70%
System Installed on time?	319	0	0.00%

Average Collection size:		721638

Type	Count
Public	190
Academic	56
School	1
Consortium	24
Special	9

Size Category	Count
[1] Under 10,000	7
[2] 10,001-100,000	105
[3] 100,001-250,000	73
[4] 250,001-1,000,000	65
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,000	40
[6] over 10,000,001	3

Statistics according to type and size categories

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

2021 Symphony Responses by Sector
Symphony	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	332	7.01	27	6.41	10	7.10	6	6.67	113	7.04	50	7.42	10	7.50	3		23	7.13
ILSFunctionality	333	7.02	27	6.52	10	7.10	6	6.83	113	7.08	50	7.12	10	7.40	3		24	7.29
PrintFunctionality	329	7.49	27	7.30	10	7.50	6	7.67	112	7.34	50	7.66	10	8.10	3		24	7.63
ElectronicFunctionality	329	6.01	27	5.11	10	6.10	6	5.33	112	6.21	50	6.26	10	6.40	3		23	5.83
SatisfactionCustomerSupport	326	7.54	27	6.93	10	7.50	6	8.50	111	7.39	49	7.80	9	8.22	3		24	7.88
CompanyLoyalty	330	6.93	27	5.85	10	6.50	6	5.83	111	6.98	50	7.68	10	7.80	3		24	7.54

2021 Survey Results
Product: Symphony		Response Distribution										Statistics
Category	Responses	0	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	Mode	Mean	Median
ILS Satisfaction	332	5	1	6	3	12	19	34	109	91	52	7	7.01	7
ILS Functionality	333	2		6	5	12	27	31	103	102	45	7	7.02	7
Print Functionality	329	1	2	1	3	8	16	24	74	123	77	8	7.49	8
Electronic Functionality	329	20	4	9	17	14	45	51	71	62	36	7	6.01	7
Company Satisfaction	327	4	2	6	7	11	21	19	85	112	60	8	7.12	8
Support Satisfaction	326	3	2	3	5	7	18	17	56	112	103	8	7.54	8
Support Improvement	0											0	0.00
Company Loyalty	330	11	2	8	9	11	29	23	58	103	76	8	6.93	8
Open Source Interest	290	80	27	25	24	22	42	14	23	21	7	0	3.36	3

Category	Total	Yes	percent
Considering new ILS	342	53	15.50%
Considering new Interface	342	15	4.39%
System Installed on time?	342	0	0.00%

Average Collection size:		2283406

Type	Count
Public	191
Academic	47
School	3
Consortium	24
Special	6

Size Category	Count
[1] Under 10,000	9
[2] 10,001-100,000	109
[3] 100,001-250,000	72
[4] 250,001-1,000,000	78
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,000	43
[6] over 10,000,001	5

2020 Survey Results
Product: Symphony		Response Distribution										Statistics
Category	Responses	0	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	Mode	Mean	Median
ILS Satisfaction	321	2	2	7	5	10	22	35	98	96	44	7	6.98	7
ILS Functionality	322		1	2	13	7	18	48	82	112	39	8	7.05	7
Print Functionality	318	1		3	5	7	13	28	69	112	80	8	7.49	8
Electronic Functionality	308	8	9	12	21	17	44	51	72	44	30	7	5.90	6
Company Satisfaction	317		2	7	6	12	16	30	83	100	61	8	7.17	8
Support Satisfaction	314		1	5	6	5	14	22	51	107	103	8	7.61	8
Support Improvement	0											0	0.00
Company Loyalty	316	8	4	7	10	8	24	22	70	77	86	9	7.00	8
Open Source Interest	285	85	22	39	22	14	31	16	16	18	16	0	3.27	2

Category	Total	Yes	percent
Considering new ILS	331	57	17.22%
Considering new Interface	331	16	4.83%
System Installed on time?	331	0	0.00%

Average Collection size:		860340

Type	Count
Public	193
Academic	79
School	9
Consortium	24
Special	6

Size Category	Count
[1] Under 10,000	8
[2] 10,001-100,000	108
[3] 100,001-250,000	70
[4] 250,001-1,000,000	73
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,000	42
[6] over 10,000,001	5

2019 Survey Results
Product: Symphony		Response Distribution										Statistics
Category	Responses	0	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	Mode	Mean	Median
ILS Satisfaction	439	5	11	8	9	16	33	67	115	122	53	8	6.70	7
ILS Functionality	436	4	10	3	11	21	27	69	118	126	47	8	6.74	7
Print Functionality	433	5	6	3	9	17	23	43	92	163	72	8	7.10	8
Electronic Functionality	426	18	17	22	16	40	48	59	95	74	37	7	5.76	6
Company Satisfaction	434	7	10	5	14	21	27	54	97	131	68	8	6.78	7
Support Satisfaction	423	5	3	7	9	16	30	36	71	130	116	8	7.22	8
Support Improvement	422	6	5	3	8	43	108	56	58	64	71	5	6.26	6
Company Loyalty	429	23	13	10	16	22	32	42	72	97	102	9	6.48	7
Open Source Interest	429	132	46	48	28	56	40	23	18	20	18	0	2.88	2

Category	Total	Yes	percent
Considering new ILS	443	75	16.93%
Considering new Interface	443	51	11.51%
System Installed on time?	443	404	91.20%

Average Collection size:		674873

Type	Count
Public	258
Academic	112
School	12
Consortium	28
Special	6

Size Category	Count
[1] Under 10,000	19
[2] 10,001-100,000	148
[3] 100,001-250,000	84
[4] 250,001-1,000,000	100
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,000	60
[6] over 10,000,001	4

2018 Survey Results
Product: Symphony		Response Distribution										Statistics
Category	Responses	0	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	Mode	Mean	Median
ILS Satisfaction	473	5	4	5	15	18	34	65	157	118	52	7	6.77	7
ILS Functionality	471	3	5	7	16	16	46	76	125	122	55	7	6.72	7
Print Functionality	471	8	4	8	6	10	28	51	104	162	90	8	7.13	8
Electronic Functionality	460	22	16	25	23	38	50	79	108	58	41	7	5.65	6
Company Satisfaction	468	4	6	11	15	18	33	56	137	120	68	7	6.79	7
Support Satisfaction	462	2	7	13	8	19	34	39	103	122	115	8	7.08	8
Support Improvement	448	9	1	11	14	37	137	49	52	66	72	5	6.10	6
Company Loyalty	459	18	9	20	17	27	41	47	95	88	97	9	6.40	7
Open Source Interest	460	158	56	58	23	43	43	31	24	5	19	0	2.59	2

Category	Total	Yes	percent
Considering new ILS	481	89	18.50%
Considering new Interface	481	45	9.36%
System Installed on time?	481	435	90.44%

Average Collection size:		552666

Type	Count
Public	283
Academic	122
School	13
Consortium	25
Special	8

Size Category	Count
[1] Under 10,000	14
[2] 10,001-100,000	173
[3] 100,001-250,000	104
[4] 250,001-1,000,000	108
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,000	53
[6] over 10,000,001	2

2017 Survey Results
Product: Symphony		Response Distribution										Statistics
Category	Responses	0	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	Mode	Mean	Median
ILS Satisfaction	531	5	5	13	14	23	39	89	154	122	67	7	6.69	7
ILS Functionality	531	1	7	15	13	24	45	92	150	130	54	7	6.64	7
Print Functionality	523	4	3	12	8	15	30	54	124	177	96	8	7.14	8
Electronic Functionality	525	14	21	34	30	41	76	87	109	78	35	7	5.61	6
Company Satisfaction	523	4	8	10	13	24	54	73	116	133	88	8	6.77	7
Support Satisfaction	518	3	7	6	16	17	38	53	100	160	118	8	7.11	8
Support Improvement	512	5	1	9	8	45	137	61	83	89	74	5	6.31	6
Company Loyalty	516	31	5	23	13	25	51	56	107	103	102	7	6.34	7
Open Source Interest	517	160	69	65	33	68	51	27	21	7	16	0	2.58	2

Category	Total	Yes	percent
Considering new ILS	536	107	19.96%
Considering new Interface	536	51	9.51%
System Installed on time?	536	486	90.67%

Average Collection size:		633322

Type	Count
Public	301
Academic	141
School	16
Consortium	32
Special	9

Size Category	Count
[1] Under 10,000	23
[2] 10,001-100,000	179
[3] 100,001-250,000	116
[4] 250,001-1,000,000	122
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,000	66
[6] over 10,000,001	3

2016 Survey Results
Product: Symphony		Response Distribution										Statistics
Category	Responses	0	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	Mode	Mean	Median
ILS Satisfaction	431	3	4	10	12	17	31	58	126	117	53	7	6.79	7
ILS Functionality	431	2	2	9	13	21	31	54	132	111	56	7	6.82	7
Print Functionality	426	6	1	4	8	11	17	31	104	153	91	8	7.32	8
Electronic Functionality	422	16	12	24	22	38	45	78	80	73	34	7	5.74	6
Company Satisfaction	427	6	4	11	10	21	32	49	110	111	73	8	6.81	7
Support Satisfaction	418	4	4	5	10	17	29	44	91	111	103	8	7.11	8
Support Improvement	410	5	4	5	8	44	101	53	50	67	73	5	6.29	6
Company Loyalty	425	17	11	7	11	16	46	41	84	90	102	9	6.64	7
Open Source Interest	418	140	57	54	32	46	38	20	11	6	14	0	2.41	2

Category	Total	Yes	percent
Considering new ILS	436	81	18.58%
Considering new Interface	436	49	11.24%
System Installed on time?	436	402	92.20%

Average Collection size:		2753248

Type	Count
Public	235
Academic	132
School	14
Consortium	25
Special	1

Size Category	Count
[1] Under 10,000	16
[2] 10,001-100,000	151
[3] 100,001-250,000	91
[4] 250,001-1,000,000	96
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,000	59
[6] over 10,000,001	5

2015 Survey Results
Product: Symphony		Response Distribution										Statistics
Category	Responses	0	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	Mode	Mean	Median
ILS Satisfaction	437	5	6	12	8	20	37	58	131	113	47	7	6.66	7
ILS Functionality	436		8	15	12	18	41	54	132	116	40	7	6.62	7
Print Functionality	437	4	5	4	5	17	22	36	123	144	77	8	7.16	8
Electronic Functionality	432	12	20	23	27	35	62	61	89	69	34	7	5.66	6
Company Satisfaction	432	5	9	13	15	18	30	51	109	119	63	8	6.69	7
Support Satisfaction	427	5	4	14	12	15	33	36	101	123	84	8	6.92	7
Support Improvement	420	8	7	3	5	46	108	42	71	69	61	5	6.20	6
Company Loyalty	433	23	14	10	9	23	44	49	84	97	80	8	6.35	7
Open Source Interest	426	153	61	59	27	40	37	15	15	5	14	0	2.27	1

Category	Total	Yes	percent
Considering new ILS	460	82	17.83%
Considering new Interface	460	47	10.22%
System Installed on time?	460	402	87.39%

Average Collection size:		653631

Type	Count
Public	256
Academic	116
School	22
Consortium	27
Special	3

Size Category	Count
[1] Under 10,000	21
[2] 10,001-100,000	168
[3] 100,001-250,000	91
[4] 250,001-1,000,000	98
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,000	51
[6] over 10,000,001	1

2014 Survey Results
Product: Symphony		Response Distribution										Statistics
Category	Responses	0	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	Mode	Mean	Median
ILS Satisfaction	354	1	4	9	16	14	29	55	124	76	26	7	6.53	7
ILS Functionality	355	1	2	11	13	16	29	66	104	85	28	7	6.56	7
Print Functionality	351	3	2	4	4	11	13	43	81	125	65	8	7.24	8
Electronic Functionality	347	10	19	28	34	17	45	63	72	41	18	7	5.31	6
Company Satisfaction	352		9	12	17	19	26	57	98	80	34	7	6.43	7
Support Satisfaction	348	2	4	7	11	13	29	50	86	89	57	8	6.82	7
Support Improvement	339	2	3	2	9	38	96	29	49	53	58	5	6.28	6
Company Loyalty	343	13	12	13	17	22	38	43	56	68	61	8	6.15	7
Open Source Interest	346	108	61	49	26	31	25	18	6	8	14	0	2.39	2

Category	Total	Yes	percent
Considering new ILS	361	76	21.05%
Considering new Interface	361	52	14.40%
System Installed on time?	361	322	89.20%

Average Collection size:		707313

Type	Count
Public	182
Academic	111
School	7
Consortium	19
Special	6

Size Category	Count
[1] Under 10,000	14
[2] 10,001-100,000	118
[3] 100,001-250,000	81
[4] 250,001-1,000,000	75
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,000	49
[6] over 10,000,001	2

2013 Survey Results
Product: Symphony		Response Distribution										Statistics
Category	Responses	0	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	Mode	Mean	Median
ILS Satisfaction	315	3	3	8	14	18	23	36	99	74	37	7	6.61	7
ILS Functionality	314	2	2	7	20	10	20	52	88	72	41	7	6.65	7
Print Functionality	314	3	1	3	4	9	20	35	76	99	64	8	7.21	8
Electronic Functionality	307	7	17	21	29	24	46	52	50	36	25	6	5.36	6
Company Satisfaction	313	4	9	10	16	14	17	43	81	77	42	7	6.51	7
Support Satisfaction	312	4	3	6	8	16	26	28	77	79	65	8	6.91	7
Support Improvement	307	4	2	7	5	17	83	23	57	50	59	5	6.46	7
Company Loyalty	312	21	8	10	9	17	41	26	56	61	63	9	6.19	7
Open Source Interest	304	90	34	49	22	27	40	13	13	7	9	0	2.67	2

Category	Total	Yes	percent
Considering new ILS	324	66	20.37%
Considering new Interface	324	58	17.90%
System Installed on time?	324	292	90.12%

Average Collection size:		835498

Type	Count
Public	139
Academic	87
School	29
Consortium	26
Special	3

Size Category	Count
[1] Under 10,000	24
[2] 10,001-100,000	80
[3] 100,001-250,000	64
[4] 250,001-1,000,000	67
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,000	41
[6] over 10,000,001	2

2012 Survey Results
Product: Symphony		Response Distribution										Statistics
Category	Responses	0	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	Mode	Mean	Median
ILS Satisfaction	380	2	2	10	19	25	48	50	122	72	30	7	6.37	7
ILS Functionality	380	1	1	5	24	24	41	47	114	94	29	7	6.52	7
Print Functionality	0											0	0.00
Electronic Functionality	0											0	0.00
Company Satisfaction	378	1	6	14	26	22	43	65	98	71	32	7	6.21	7
Support Satisfaction	378	1	5	11	14	35	44	36	102	80	50	7	6.48	7
Support Improvement	371	3	3	6	16	26	99	45	55	69	49	5	6.23	6
Company Loyalty	376	30	11	22	18	25	48	33	76	54	59	7	5.70	7
Open Source Interest	374	97	44	47	35	35	42	28	19	13	14	0	3.01	2

Category	Total	Yes	percent
Considering new ILS	393	79	20.10%
Considering new Interface	393	76	19.34%
System Installed on time?	393	348	88.55%

Average Collection size:		644460

Type	Count
Public	206
Academic	114
School	4
Consortium	21
Special	9

Size Category	Count
[1] Under 10,000	17
[2] 10,001-100,000	125
[3] 100,001-250,000	93
[4] 250,001-1,000,000	80
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,000	54
[6] over 10,000,001	2

2011 Survey Results
Product: Symphony		Response Distribution										Statistics
Category	Responses	0	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	Mode	Mean	Median
ILS Satisfaction	326	5	6	9	11	21	37	61	102	57	17	7	6.18	7
ILS Functionality	320	1	2	7	18	18	30	63	93	69	19	7	6.39	7
Print Functionality	0											0	0.00
Electronic Functionality	0											0	0.00
Company Satisfaction	326	6	7	19	20	24	35	58	83	53	21	7	5.88	6
Support Satisfaction	324	4	10	11	14	18	44	54	72	68	29	7	6.17	7
Support Improvement	323	5	10	10	12	28	81	37	60	48	32	5	5.87	6
Company Loyalty	323	23	16	16	13	31	44	40	54	55	31	8	5.47	6
Open Source Interest	318	63	32	48	21	34	45	18	27	12	18	0	3.48	3

Category	Total	Yes	percent
Considering new ILS	333	76	22.82%
Considering new Interface	333	88	26.43%
System Installed on time?	333	303	90.99%

Average Collection size:		570393

Type	Count
Public	151
Academic	116
School	4
Consortium	15
Special	10

Size Category	Count
[1] Under 10,000	10
[2] 10,001-100,000	98
[3] 100,001-250,000	77
[4] 250,001-1,000,000	84
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,000	40
[6] over 10,000,001	1

2010 Survey Results
Product: Symphony		Response Distribution										Statistics
Category	Responses	0	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	Mode	Mean	Median
ILS Satisfaction	271	3	5	9	12	19	37	41	77	50	18	7	6.15	7
ILS Functionality	0											0	0.00
Print Functionality	0											0	0.00
Electronic Functionality	0											0	0.00
Company Satisfaction	271	8	8	17	11	26	37	54	57	39	14	7	5.63	6
Support Satisfaction	269	8	7	15	20	23	32	50	56	39	19	7	5.67	6
Support Improvement	271	11	7	16	28	21	87	26	26	26	23	5	5.15	5
Company Loyalty	270	18	15	10	24	29	34	40	40	32	28	6	5.26	6
Open Source Interest	269	64	26	30	17	19	31	29	19	14	20	0	3.59	3

Category	Total	Yes	percent
Considering new ILS	282	57	20.21%
Considering new Interface	282	81	28.72%
System Installed on time?	282	242	85.82%

Average Collection size:		580366

Type	Count
Public	142
Academic	88
School	4
Consortium	15
Special	10

Size Category	Count
[1] Under 10,000	5
[2] 10,001-100,000	85
[3] 100,001-250,000	51
[4] 250,001-1,000,000	54
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,000	28
[6] over 10,000,001	1

2009 Survey Results
Product: Symphony		Response Distribution										Statistics
Category	Responses	0	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	Mode	Mean	Median
ILS Satisfaction	304	3	5	6	9	16	62	56	96	44	7	7	6.06	6
ILS Functionality	0											0	0.00
Print Functionality	0											0	0.00
Electronic Functionality	0											0	0.00
Company Satisfaction	303	5	9	27	23	22	56	48	79	29	5	7	5.34	6
Support Satisfaction	303	3	12	30	23	17	54	45	66	41	12	7	5.44	6
Support Improvement	292	7	11	19	29	23	89	35	39	30	10	5	5.09	5
Company Loyalty	301	32	14	12	14	23	67	31	49	43	16	5	5.06	5
Open Source Interest	300	53	34	26	25	30	40	25	20	23	24	0	3.90	4

Category	Total	Yes	percent
Considering new ILS	310	49	15.81%
Considering new Interface	310	85	27.42%
System Installed on time?	310	261	84.19%

2008 Survey Results
Product: Symphony		Response Distribution										Statistics
Category	Responses	0	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	Mode	Mean	Median
ILS Satisfaction	233	4	7	11	19	16	35	37	64	32	8	7	5.68	6
ILS Functionality	0											0	0.00
Print Functionality	0											0	0.00
Electronic Functionality	0											0	0.00
Company Satisfaction	234	9	9	16	31	28	23	43	43	26	6	6	5.05	6
Support Satisfaction	233	12	14	23	18	21	36	39	38	23	9	6	4.91	5
Support Improvement	0	not applicable
Company Loyalty	233	21	13	19	18	17	36	20	43	34	12	7	4.95	5
Open Source Interest	231	36	23	21	24	17	37	12	23	16	22	5	4.11	4

Category	Total	Yes	percent
Considering new ILS	234	54	23.08%
Considering new Interface	234	69	29.49%
System Installed on time?	234	214	91.45%

2007 Survey Results
Product: Symphony		Response Distribution										Statistics
Category	Responses	0	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	Mode	Mean	Median
ILS Satisfaction	200	4	1	5	10	6	23	29	64	43	15	7	6.41	7
ILS Functionality	0											0	0.00
Print Functionality	0											0	0.00
Electronic Functionality	0											0	0.00
Company Satisfaction	284	5	8	20	23	27	43	47	61	38	12	7	5.50	6
Support Satisfaction	282	6	10	13	27	37	33	42	64	34	16	7	5.48	6
Support Improvement	0	not applicable
Company Loyalty	279	25	10	12	9	16	59	31	42	36	39	5	5.52	6
Open Source Interest	281	54	41	36	32	17	36	21	14	9	21	0	3.35	3

Category	Total	Yes	percent
Considering new ILS	288	42	14.58%
Considering new Interface	288	60	20.83%
System Installed on time?	288	1	0.35%

2022 : gen: 6.73 company 6.99 loyalty 6.52 support 7.39

2021 : gen: 7.01 company 7.12 loyalty 6.93 support 7.54

2020 : gen: 6.98 company 7.17 loyalty 7.00 support 7.61

2019 : gen: 6.70 company 6.78 loyalty 6.48 support 7.22

2018 : gen: 6.77 company 6.79 loyalty 6.40 support 7.08

2017 : gen: 6.69 company 6.77 loyalty 6.34 support 7.11

2016 : gen: 6.79 company 6.81 loyalty 6.64 support 7.11

2015 : gen: 6.66 company 6.69 loyalty 6.35 support 6.92

2014 : gen: 6.53 company 6.43 loyalty 6.15 support 6.82

2013 : gen: 6.61 company 6.51 loyalty 6.19 support 6.91

2012 : gen: 6.37 company 6.21 loyalty 5.70 support 6.48

2011 : gen: 6.18 company 5.88 loyalty 5.47 support 6.17

2010 : gen: 6.15 company 5.63 loyalty 5.26 support 5.67

2009 : gen: 6.06 company 5.34 loyalty 5.06 support 5.44

2008 : gen: 5.68 company 5.05 loyalty 4.95 support 4.91

2007 : gen: 6.41 company 5.50 loyalty 5.52 support 5.48

Comments (survey2021)

Interested in alternative discovery products; Enterprise showing its age. (Library type: Consortium; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 6)

[...] (Library type: Consortium; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 8)

We find that Enterprise is difficult for patrons to find what they want. We are looking at discovery layer products and will probably go with BiblioCommons' BiblioCore. Its relevancy ranking and FRBR listing make it much easier for patrons to navigate the catalog. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 8)

In my experience, open source is a hassle and a headache, especially if you are already short staffed. To add to that we are having a very hard time filling our Technical Services/Electronic Resources/Resource Sharing open position. So going open source is completely out of the question. (Library type: Academic; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 6)

I would never consider an ILS that takes us backwards. SIRSI does a lot for us and I feel like an open source product does not have all that we need. (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 8)

We are the only academic library in a consortium that shares a SirsiDynix Symphony system. Most of the database management and almost all customer support interactions with SirsiDynix are done centrally by the consortium. We use Enterprise as our discovery layer for Symphony, but do not subscribe to a broader discovery service for our resources as a whole. The consortium will be developing in RFP for an ILS soon, and will be looking at all bidders, with no specific intention to stay with or leave SirsiDynix. Any decision to adopt an open source ILS would have to be made by the consortium as a whole, and that seems unlikely. (Library type: Academic; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 7)

We get outstanding service from our consortium, and rarely work directly with the vendor. We are extremely likely to stay with the consortium. (Library type: State; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 8)

We are currently configuring FOLIO's e-resource management module. We are interested in possibly moving to FOLIO, but i wouldn't say that's under serious consideration at this time. (Library type: Academic; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 6)

I'm not sure why we are being asked about Academic Discovery Services--we are a public library. I answered for general patrons instead of undergrads or graduate students. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 5)

Current setup of Symphony doesn't work well for a consortium. Difficult to locate library in search list when so many libraries involved. Improvements have been suggested to the vendor. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 6)

Regretfully open source (e.g. Folio) have not reached their potential, and are 'missing' some critical elements for an ILS at this point. We would consider open source in 3-4 years, once initiatives such as Folio have reached their potential. (Library type: Academic; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 6)

We are happy with our current system but we would like to join a consortium which is on a different system (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 8)

My only complaint has to do with cost. We have been a SirsiDynix customer since we automated in the early 90's. Thirty years worth of cost increases means that we pay significantly more than our peer institutions who are also SirsiDynix customers- practically double from what I can gather. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 9)

Seems there are often ILS issues at our library; we are constantly contacting IT support. (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 7)

We're part of large, state supported consortium in Ohio, so we can't switch vendors without considerable planning and buy in from all stakeholders. If we were a standalone library, I likely already would've switched to an open source solution. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 7)

we're nervous about all of the consolidation in the market. We're interested in FOLIO but worry it's not developed enough yet for us to commit. (Library type: Academic; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 6)

We have a small staff, so we would need to carefully consider whether or not we could devote the hours necessary to run an open-source system properly. We did consider such a system when we migrated to our current system but found that staying with a known vendor was more economical overall. (Library type: Academic; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 9)

SirsiDynix has been our ILS vendor for over 15 years. The people are wonderful to work with. The biggest complaint is this: when SirsiDynix develops a new feature, e.g.: web based client for WorkFlows, "Data Control", or mobile staff clients, they require their loyal customer base to pay more money for these new developments as add-ons. This functionality keeps their product relevant in a changing technology landscape. To be required to pay even more from ever dwindling budgets seems out of step with the current realities faced by academic libraries. (Library type: Academic; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 7)

SirsiDynix has been slow to innovate and open source options, especially where discovery layers are concerned are becoming more attractive to our library consortium. The BLUEcloud products have been in the works for years and still cannot fully meet the needs of our libraries. (Library type: State; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 6)

Our main libraries are going to Folio, so we may follow sometime in the future. (Library type: ; collection size: large; ils satisfaction: 9)

We are disappointed that the development of the BlueCloud Suite products has been so slow. The current interface and report structure for Symphony is dated and clunky, and when we migrated a while back the product line they were touting was BlueCloud. We understand there are many pressures on the SIRSI company to develop new products and earn revenue from them, but it's important to follow through on developing basic functionality for BlueCloud products. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 7)

We did consider open source ILSes in our search for a new system; however, there was not one that fit our requirements. (Library type: ; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 0)

We are part of a 23 library consortium and we share our union catalog. (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 8)

None. (Library type: Academic; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 8)

SirsiDynix have a new pilot product called Cloudsource+ which will incorporate their new CloudSourceOA product (an add on which provides access to open source material) as well as being able to include subscription ejournals and packages. This may become our primary discovery product. (Library type: Government Agency; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 8)

Print Collection has 62,637 units. Digital Library Collection has 138,773 units. Our ILS only catalogs the print material, one Digital Library service (Overdrive) integrates with the public discovery platform. The rest of the Digital Library services are linked on the website, but patrons have to open each one to search for content. That is our biggest frustration with our ILS vendor. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 6)

We recently migrated in January of this year [2021] from Polaris/Innovative to Symphony/SirsiDynix. We are still learning, but find that the new system is easier to use. One main criticism I have of both is the necessity to make an added purchase to have a useful tool for generating reports. Polaris does allow the use of SQL but Symphony does not. Polaris sells Simply Reports, which I found very usable. We still have not purchased Bluecloud Analytics from SirsiDynix, so cannot make a direct comparison. I am now using Symphony WorkFlows reporting tools, which are much better than Polaris' canned reports. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 8)

With regard to the question about objectivity across publishers, the fight between ProQuest and EBSCO is long-standing and well-known. They won’t share their secrets with each other, so EBSCO resources don’t work as well in ProQuest products and vice versa. (Library type: ; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 5)

The decision to change ILS comes with the ending of a private school consortium that had a contract with Sirsi. The contract is over, so each school in the consortium is now free to select their own ILS for 2022-23 academic year. (Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 1)

We are coming to the end of our licensing cycle, therefore our process is to re-evaluate our current library system (RFP) (Library type: ; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 7)

I was previously the ILS administrator for the county co-op just after the migration to Symphony in 2016. I left in 2018 to work in an academic library with III products. The difference in support was night and day, Sirsi is far superior. I left academia to help implement Symphony (and other products) at the MBRL in Dubai, UAE with Naseej, Sirsi's vendor in the Middle East. The ease of integrating other resources such as self check, gates, autostore and the like with Symphony was outstanding. I'm again at a public library in Florida using the same instance of Symphony I administered (without the obligation to admin anything) and I couldn't be more pleased with the ILS. (Library type: ; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 8)

Our consortium's consideration of FOLIO is being motivated primarily by our largest member library, [...]. They are seeking a cost-effective platform that is flexible enough to handle an organization as varies as ours. [...] includes large academics, community colleges, regional systems with "One Horse Town" branches, and everything in between. (Library type: ; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)

Interested in learning more about eResource Central (Library type: Academic; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 7)

We are in the second group to migrate, so we are not on Aspen yet. We will be using Enterprise through March 2022, as consortia has chosen a phased implementation. I do not have opinions on Aspen at this time. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 7)

It'll be interesting to see what upgrades SirsiDynix will bring with their BlueCloud web modules for all the essential functions of Symphony. Until they are fully developed though, we must continue to use Symphony, which continues to be a fair system but outdated software and has never been as user-friendly as Polaris. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 5)

Customer service is great especially if you are platinum but important changes move very slowly and the system is not user friendly. (Library type: ; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 3)

We go live on Symphony on March 7, 2022. (Library type: State; collection size: large; ils satisfaction: 8)

As a special library we would like a 'Academic Discovery Service' integrated with SirsiDynix Enterprise but don't have the budget, therefore we are interested in SirsiDynix new product CloudSource Open Access. (Library type: Government Agency; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 7)

The Symphony LMS is an excellent consortium product, with extensive functionality and flexibility to suit all consortium member library needs. However, the staff client (Workflows and SymphonyWeb) is outdated, and we are still waiting for the newer BLUEcloud Staff client's functionality to reach parity for day-to-day use in a public library environment. (Library type: ; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 7)

I have been working with SirsiDynix for the last eight years. Recently, I accepted the Technology Manager role here at [...] after our previous manager retired. The relationship and trust I have with the support staff made the transition much easier for our library system. (Library type: ; collection size: large; ils satisfaction: 9)

There are some basic circulation features that are missing from Sirsi's BLUEcloud suite. For example, policy management hasn't been addressed in BLUEcloud. There is a possibility we would consider open source options in the future if basic features are not addressed by BLUEcloud in the coming years. (Library type: ; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 7)

[...] (Library type: Medical; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 9)

SirsiDynix customer care is excellent. Their Symphony DataControl product is fabulous. (Library type: ; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 6)

Our library region has been with SirsiDynix since 1999. During that time, the company has managed to keep up with library needs and trends. The customer service improved greatly over the past few years in terms of quicker response and follow-up. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 9)

[...] (Library type: Medical; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)

We may consider an open source ILS in the future if the costs of SirsiDynix keep going up for everything we need. For example paying thousands of dollars more a year for a web service license in order for us to do development is not a way to make the boss happy. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 8)

We are very pleased with the product developments from SirsiDynix. Their customer service is friendly and responsive. I appreciate their Library Resource Managers, who are former librarians, who help us integrate products and training. Our LRM does an excellent job of keeping me regularly informed. (Library type: Academic; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 9)

Library staff has been reduced in the last few years. There is no longer a technology specialist on the library staff. Working with IT outside of the library is very convoluted in this federal agency. (Library type: Government Agency; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 6)

SIRSI is just terrible. We cannot wait to switch (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 0)

Main concern with OpenSource ILS (Koha being the most popular) is a lack of knowledge and familiarity about working with Linux OS. (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 7)

We are very happy with the service provided by [...] and Symphony, even though there are some aspects that are a bit "clunky" - but we have yet to find a system that is perfect! If another ILS is recommended by the consortium, we would investigate it. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 7)

LMS is only part of the picture; RFID supplier is just as important for managing the physical collection. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 8)

We value and appreciate the people at SirsiDynix. While the product is great, the people are what take it over the top. (Library type: Public; collection size: large; ils satisfaction: 9)

With our staffing, we can only consider fully-supported open source solutions with annual or longer support contracts. We believe open source products with support contracts are likely to allow the library more capabilities than the same expense with a proprietary vendor. (Library type: ; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 5)

[...] (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 0)

The rating on questions 1,2 and 4 are primarily based due to the lack of a module or feature to manage electronic resources. (Library type: Law; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 6)

We have been participating in an Open Source online articles trial that integrates with our current LMS and have signed up for the live version. (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 7)

You didn't ask for public library feedback on discovery services but BiblioCore is an excellent product from BiblioCommons, especially for public libraries (Library type: Public; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 7)

I am retiring after over 50 years working at this library and amost 40 as director. When the new director becomes familiar with the position,[...] I feel she will lead the library to look at open source considerations. Since I am leaving, it is not the right time to make that sort of a change. (Library type: Consortium; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 8)

Our online catalog is done via BiblioCore (BiblioCommons). (Library type: Public; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 7)

While we are satisfied with SirsiDynix, we are always considering options from qualified organizations providing similar services. Thank you for including [...]. As an FYI, we had EBSCO Discovery Service as our discovery layer, and in the future recommend you consider adding discovery service survey questions for non-Academic libraries. Best wishes, The Team at HPL (Library type: ; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 7)

As is with most ILS vendors the support is great. However Symphony infrastructure is old and cranky. I know they've been working on BlueCloud, however that has been going on for years and the product still leaves quite a bit to be desired. Simply not usable by public libraries at this time. (Library type: Public; collection size: large; ils satisfaction: 2)

Migration to a new ILS only happened in 12/2020 so there are still things being learned, tweaks being made, and some products that aren't being fully taken advantage of yet. (Library type: Theology; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 7)

ILS

Library Technology Guides is a service provided by Marshall Breeding, independent consultant, author, and speaker.