Library Technology Guides

Documents, Databases, News, and Commentary

Select another Product Report:

Statistical Report for Symphony

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
SymphonyallAcademicPublicSchoolConsortium
smallmediumlargesmallmediumlarge
navgnavgnavgnavgnavgnavgnavgnavgnavg
SatisfactionLevelILS3327.01 276.41107.1066.671137.04507.42107.503237.13
ILSFunctionality3337.02 276.52107.1066.831137.08507.12107.403247.29
PrintFunctionality3297.49 277.30107.5067.671127.34507.66108.103247.63
ElectronicFunctionality3296.01 275.11106.1065.331126.21506.26106.403235.83
SatisfactionCustomerSupport3267.54 276.93107.5068.501117.39497.8098.223247.88
CompanyLoyalty3306.93 275.85106.5065.831116.98507.68107.803247.54



2021 Survey Results
Product: Symphony Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction332 5 1 6 3 12 19 34 109 91 52 77.017
ILS Functionality333 2 6 5 12 27 31 103 102 45 77.027
Print Functionality329 1 2 1 3 8 16 24 74 123 77 87.498
Electronic Functionality329 20 4 9 17 14 45 51 71 62 36 76.017
Company Satisfaction327 4 2 6 7 11 21 19 85 112 60 87.128
Support Satisfaction326 3 2 3 5 7 18 17 56 112 103 87.548
Support Improvement0 00.00
Company Loyalty330 11 2 8 9 11 29 23 58 103 76 86.938
Open Source Interest290 80 27 25 24 22 42 14 23 21 7 03.363

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS342 5315.50%
Considering new Interface342 154.39%
System Installed on time?342 00.00%

Average Collection size: 2283406

TypeCount
Public191
Academic47
School3
Consortium24
Special6

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,0009
[2] 10,001-100,000109
[3] 100,001-250,00072
[4] 250,001-1,000,00078
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,00043
[6] over 10,000,0015



2020 Survey Results
Product: Symphony Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction321 2 2 7 5 10 22 35 98 96 44 76.987
ILS Functionality322 1 2 13 7 18 48 82 112 39 87.057
Print Functionality318 1 3 5 7 13 28 69 112 80 87.498
Electronic Functionality308 8 9 12 21 17 44 51 72 44 30 75.906
Company Satisfaction317 2 7 6 12 16 30 83 100 61 87.178
Support Satisfaction314 1 5 6 5 14 22 51 107 103 87.618
Support Improvement0 00.00
Company Loyalty316 8 4 7 10 8 24 22 70 77 86 97.008
Open Source Interest285 85 22 39 22 14 31 16 16 18 16 03.272

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS331 5717.22%
Considering new Interface331 164.83%
System Installed on time?331 00.00%

Average Collection size: 860340

TypeCount
Public193
Academic79
School9
Consortium24
Special6

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,0008
[2] 10,001-100,000108
[3] 100,001-250,00070
[4] 250,001-1,000,00073
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,00042
[6] over 10,000,0015



2019 Survey Results
Product: Symphony Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction439 5 11 8 9 16 33 67 115 122 53 86.707
ILS Functionality436 4 10 3 11 21 27 69 118 126 47 86.747
Print Functionality433 5 6 3 9 17 23 43 92 163 72 87.108
Electronic Functionality426 18 17 22 16 40 48 59 95 74 37 75.766
Company Satisfaction434 7 10 5 14 21 27 54 97 131 68 86.787
Support Satisfaction423 5 3 7 9 16 30 36 71 130 116 87.228
Support Improvement422 6 5 3 8 43 108 56 58 64 71 56.266
Company Loyalty429 23 13 10 16 22 32 42 72 97 102 96.487
Open Source Interest429 132 46 48 28 56 40 23 18 20 18 02.882

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS443 7516.93%
Considering new Interface443 5111.51%
System Installed on time?443 40491.20%

Average Collection size: 674873

TypeCount
Public258
Academic112
School12
Consortium28
Special6

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,00019
[2] 10,001-100,000148
[3] 100,001-250,00084
[4] 250,001-1,000,000100
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,00060
[6] over 10,000,0014



2018 Survey Results
Product: Symphony Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction473 5 4 5 15 18 34 65 157 118 52 76.777
ILS Functionality471 3 5 7 16 16 46 76 125 122 55 76.727
Print Functionality471 8 4 8 6 10 28 51 104 162 90 87.138
Electronic Functionality460 22 16 25 23 38 50 79 108 58 41 75.656
Company Satisfaction468 4 6 11 15 18 33 56 137 120 68 76.797
Support Satisfaction462 2 7 13 8 19 34 39 103 122 115 87.088
Support Improvement448 9 1 11 14 37 137 49 52 66 72 56.106
Company Loyalty459 18 9 20 17 27 41 47 95 88 97 96.407
Open Source Interest460 158 56 58 23 43 43 31 24 5 19 02.592

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS481 8918.50%
Considering new Interface481 459.36%
System Installed on time?481 43590.44%

Average Collection size: 552666

TypeCount
Public283
Academic122
School13
Consortium25
Special8

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,00014
[2] 10,001-100,000173
[3] 100,001-250,000104
[4] 250,001-1,000,000108
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,00053
[6] over 10,000,0012



2017 Survey Results
Product: Symphony Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction531 5 5 13 14 23 39 89 154 122 67 76.697
ILS Functionality531 1 7 15 13 24 45 92 150 130 54 76.647
Print Functionality523 4 3 12 8 15 30 54 124 177 96 87.148
Electronic Functionality525 14 21 34 30 41 76 87 109 78 35 75.616
Company Satisfaction523 4 8 10 13 24 54 73 116 133 88 86.777
Support Satisfaction518 3 7 6 16 17 38 53 100 160 118 87.118
Support Improvement512 5 1 9 8 45 137 61 83 89 74 56.316
Company Loyalty516 31 5 23 13 25 51 56 107 103 102 76.347
Open Source Interest517 160 69 65 33 68 51 27 21 7 16 02.582

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS536 10719.96%
Considering new Interface536 519.51%
System Installed on time?536 48690.67%

Average Collection size: 633322

TypeCount
Public301
Academic141
School16
Consortium32
Special9

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,00023
[2] 10,001-100,000179
[3] 100,001-250,000116
[4] 250,001-1,000,000122
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,00066
[6] over 10,000,0013



2016 Survey Results
Product: Symphony Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction431 3 4 10 12 17 31 58 126 117 53 76.797
ILS Functionality431 2 2 9 13 21 31 54 132 111 56 76.827
Print Functionality426 6 1 4 8 11 17 31 104 153 91 87.328
Electronic Functionality422 16 12 24 22 38 45 78 80 73 34 75.746
Company Satisfaction427 6 4 11 10 21 32 49 110 111 73 86.817
Support Satisfaction418 4 4 5 10 17 29 44 91 111 103 87.118
Support Improvement410 5 4 5 8 44 101 53 50 67 73 56.296
Company Loyalty425 17 11 7 11 16 46 41 84 90 102 96.647
Open Source Interest418 140 57 54 32 46 38 20 11 6 14 02.412

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS436 8118.58%
Considering new Interface436 4911.24%
System Installed on time?436 40292.20%

Average Collection size: 2753248

TypeCount
Public235
Academic132
School14
Consortium25
Special1

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,00016
[2] 10,001-100,000151
[3] 100,001-250,00091
[4] 250,001-1,000,00096
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,00059
[6] over 10,000,0015



2015 Survey Results
Product: Symphony Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction437 5 6 12 8 20 37 58 131 113 47 76.667
ILS Functionality436 8 15 12 18 41 54 132 116 40 76.627
Print Functionality437 4 5 4 5 17 22 36 123 144 77 87.168
Electronic Functionality432 12 20 23 27 35 62 61 89 69 34 75.666
Company Satisfaction432 5 9 13 15 18 30 51 109 119 63 86.697
Support Satisfaction427 5 4 14 12 15 33 36 101 123 84 86.927
Support Improvement420 8 7 3 5 46 108 42 71 69 61 56.206
Company Loyalty433 23 14 10 9 23 44 49 84 97 80 86.357
Open Source Interest426 153 61 59 27 40 37 15 15 5 14 02.271

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS460 8217.83%
Considering new Interface460 4710.22%
System Installed on time?460 40287.39%

Average Collection size: 653631

TypeCount
Public256
Academic116
School22
Consortium27
Special3

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,00021
[2] 10,001-100,000168
[3] 100,001-250,00091
[4] 250,001-1,000,00098
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,00051
[6] over 10,000,0011



2014 Survey Results
Product: Symphony Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction354 1 4 9 16 14 29 55 124 76 26 76.537
ILS Functionality355 1 2 11 13 16 29 66 104 85 28 76.567
Print Functionality351 3 2 4 4 11 13 43 81 125 65 87.248
Electronic Functionality347 10 19 28 34 17 45 63 72 41 18 75.316
Company Satisfaction352 9 12 17 19 26 57 98 80 34 76.437
Support Satisfaction348 2 4 7 11 13 29 50 86 89 57 86.827
Support Improvement339 2 3 2 9 38 96 29 49 53 58 56.286
Company Loyalty343 13 12 13 17 22 38 43 56 68 61 86.157
Open Source Interest346 108 61 49 26 31 25 18 6 8 14 02.392

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS361 7621.05%
Considering new Interface361 5214.40%
System Installed on time?361 32289.20%

Average Collection size: 707313

TypeCount
Public182
Academic111
School7
Consortium19
Special6

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,00014
[2] 10,001-100,000118
[3] 100,001-250,00081
[4] 250,001-1,000,00075
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,00049
[6] over 10,000,0012



2013 Survey Results
Product: Symphony Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction315 3 3 8 14 18 23 36 99 74 37 76.617
ILS Functionality314 2 2 7 20 10 20 52 88 72 41 76.657
Print Functionality314 3 1 3 4 9 20 35 76 99 64 87.218
Electronic Functionality307 7 17 21 29 24 46 52 50 36 25 65.366
Company Satisfaction313 4 9 10 16 14 17 43 81 77 42 76.517
Support Satisfaction312 4 3 6 8 16 26 28 77 79 65 86.917
Support Improvement307 4 2 7 5 17 83 23 57 50 59 56.467
Company Loyalty312 21 8 10 9 17 41 26 56 61 63 96.197
Open Source Interest304 90 34 49 22 27 40 13 13 7 9 02.672

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS324 6620.37%
Considering new Interface324 5817.90%
System Installed on time?324 29290.12%

Average Collection size: 835498

TypeCount
Public139
Academic87
School29
Consortium26
Special3

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,00024
[2] 10,001-100,00080
[3] 100,001-250,00064
[4] 250,001-1,000,00067
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,00041
[6] over 10,000,0012



2012 Survey Results
Product: Symphony Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction380 2 2 10 19 25 48 50 122 72 30 76.377
ILS Functionality380 1 1 5 24 24 41 47 114 94 29 76.527
Print Functionality0 00.00
Electronic Functionality0 00.00
Company Satisfaction378 1 6 14 26 22 43 65 98 71 32 76.217
Support Satisfaction378 1 5 11 14 35 44 36 102 80 50 76.487
Support Improvement371 3 3 6 16 26 99 45 55 69 49 56.236
Company Loyalty376 30 11 22 18 25 48 33 76 54 59 75.707
Open Source Interest374 97 44 47 35 35 42 28 19 13 14 03.012

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS393 7920.10%
Considering new Interface393 7619.34%
System Installed on time?393 34888.55%

Average Collection size: 644460

TypeCount
Public206
Academic114
School4
Consortium21
Special9

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,00017
[2] 10,001-100,000125
[3] 100,001-250,00093
[4] 250,001-1,000,00080
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,00054
[6] over 10,000,0012



2011 Survey Results
Product: Symphony Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction326 5 6 9 11 21 37 61 102 57 17 76.187
ILS Functionality320 1 2 7 18 18 30 63 93 69 19 76.397
Print Functionality0 00.00
Electronic Functionality0 00.00
Company Satisfaction326 6 7 19 20 24 35 58 83 53 21 75.886
Support Satisfaction324 4 10 11 14 18 44 54 72 68 29 76.177
Support Improvement323 5 10 10 12 28 81 37 60 48 32 55.876
Company Loyalty323 23 16 16 13 31 44 40 54 55 31 85.476
Open Source Interest318 63 32 48 21 34 45 18 27 12 18 03.483

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS333 7622.82%
Considering new Interface333 8826.43%
System Installed on time?333 30390.99%

Average Collection size: 570393

TypeCount
Public151
Academic116
School4
Consortium15
Special10

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,00010
[2] 10,001-100,00098
[3] 100,001-250,00077
[4] 250,001-1,000,00084
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,00040
[6] over 10,000,0011



2010 Survey Results
Product: Symphony Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction271 3 5 9 12 19 37 41 77 50 18 76.157
ILS Functionality0 00.00
Print Functionality0 00.00
Electronic Functionality0 00.00
Company Satisfaction271 8 8 17 11 26 37 54 57 39 14 75.636
Support Satisfaction269 8 7 15 20 23 32 50 56 39 19 75.676
Support Improvement271 11 7 16 28 21 87 26 26 26 23 55.155
Company Loyalty270 18 15 10 24 29 34 40 40 32 28 65.266
Open Source Interest269 64 26 30 17 19 31 29 19 14 20 03.593

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS282 5720.21%
Considering new Interface282 8128.72%
System Installed on time?282 24285.82%

Average Collection size: 580366

TypeCount
Public142
Academic88
School4
Consortium15
Special10

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,0005
[2] 10,001-100,00085
[3] 100,001-250,00051
[4] 250,001-1,000,00054
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,00028
[6] over 10,000,0011



2009 Survey Results
Product: Symphony Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction304 3 5 6 9 16 62 56 96 44 7 76.066
ILS Functionality0 00.00
Print Functionality0 00.00
Electronic Functionality0 00.00
Company Satisfaction303 5 9 27 23 22 56 48 79 29 5 75.346
Support Satisfaction303 3 12 30 23 17 54 45 66 41 12 75.446
Support Improvement292 7 11 19 29 23 89 35 39 30 10 55.095
Company Loyalty301 32 14 12 14 23 67 31 49 43 16 55.065
Open Source Interest300 53 34 26 25 30 40 25 20 23 24 03.904

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS310 4915.81%
Considering new Interface310 8527.42%
System Installed on time?310 26184.19%





2008 Survey Results
Product: Symphony Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction233 4 7 11 19 16 35 37 64 32 8 75.686
ILS Functionality0 00.00
Print Functionality0 00.00
Electronic Functionality0 00.00
Company Satisfaction234 9 9 16 31 28 23 43 43 26 6 65.056
Support Satisfaction233 12 14 23 18 21 36 39 38 23 9 64.915
Support Improvement0 not applicable
Company Loyalty233 21 13 19 18 17 36 20 43 34 12 74.955
Open Source Interest231 36 23 21 24 17 37 12 23 16 22 54.114

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS234 5423.08%
Considering new Interface234 6929.49%
System Installed on time?234 21491.45%





2007 Survey Results
Product: Symphony Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction200 4 1 5 10 6 23 29 64 43 15 76.417
ILS Functionality0 00.00
Print Functionality0 00.00
Electronic Functionality0 00.00
Company Satisfaction284 5 8 20 23 27 43 47 61 38 12 75.506
Support Satisfaction282 6 10 13 27 37 33 42 64 34 16 75.486
Support Improvement0 not applicable
Company Loyalty279 25 10 12 9 16 59 31 42 36 39 55.526
Open Source Interest281 54 41 36 32 17 36 21 14 9 21 03.353

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS288 4214.58%
Considering new Interface288 6020.83%
System Installed on time?288 10.35%




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)

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

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

[...] (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