Statistical Report for OPALS
| 2024 Survey Results |
| Product: OPALS |
Response Distribution |
Statistics |
|---|
| Category | Responses |
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
Mode | Mean | Median |
|---|
| ILS Satisfaction | 255 |
1 | | | | | 2 | 1 | 1 | 24 | 226 | 9 | 8.82 | 9 |
|---|
| ILS Functionality | 253 |
| 1 | | | | 1 | 1 | 4 | 74 | 172 | 9 | 8.62 | 9 |
|---|
| Print Functionality | 252 |
| 1 | | | | 1 | | 3 | 11 | 236 | 9 | 8.88 | 9 |
|---|
| Electronic Functionality | 210 |
4 | | 1 | | | 2 | 4 | 43 | 82 | 74 | 8 | 7.90 | 8 |
|---|
| Company Satisfaction | 254 |
| 1 | | | | 1 | 1 | | 30 | 221 | 9 | 8.82 | 9 |
|---|
| Support Satisfaction | 245 |
| 1 | | | | 1 | | 1 | 43 | 199 | 9 | 8.77 | 9 |
|---|
| Support Improvement | 0 |
| | | | | | | | | | 0 | 0.00 | |
|---|
| Company Loyalty | 252 |
1 | | | | | 1 | | 3 | 33 | 214 | 9 | 8.79 | 9 |
|---|
| Open Source Interest | 175 |
7 | | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 34 | 9 | 9.13 | 10 |
|---|
| Category | Total | Yes | percent |
|---|
| Considering new ILS | 258 |
3 | 1.16% |
|---|
| Considering new Interface | 258 |
2 | 0.78% |
|---|
| System Installed on time? | 258 |
0 | 0.00% |
|---|
| Average Collection size: |
| 70488 |
|---|
| Type | Count |
|---|
| Public | 1 |
|---|
| Academic | 4 |
|---|
| School | 7 |
|---|
| Consortium | 1 |
|---|
| Special | 3 |
|---|
| Size Category | Count |
|---|
| [1] Under 10,000 | 56 |
|---|
| [2] 10,001-100,000 | 159 |
|---|
| [3] 100,001-250,000 | 5 |
|---|
| [4] 250,001-1,000,000 | 11 |
|---|
| [5] 1,000,001-10,000,000 | 2 |
|---|
| [6] over 10,000,001 | 0 |
|---|
Statistics according to type and size categories
The following table presents the 2023 results according to the type and size of the library.
| 2023 OPALS Responses by Sector |
|---|
| OPALS | 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 | 273 | 8.83 |
16 | 8.44 | 3 | | 0 | | 10 | 8.90 | 0 | | 0 | | 173 | 8.90 | 12 | 8.42 |
|---|
| ILSFunctionality | 274 | 8.64 |
16 | 8.13 | 3 | | 0 | | 10 | 8.90 | 0 | | 0 | | 174 | 8.72 | 12 | 8.08 |
|---|
| PrintFunctionality | 274 | 8.90 |
16 | 8.63 | 3 | | 0 | | 10 | 9.00 | 0 | | 0 | | 174 | 8.94 | 12 | 8.67 |
|---|
| ElectronicFunctionality | 226 | 7.96 |
16 | 7.06 | 3 | | 0 | | 2 | 8.00 | 0 | | 0 | | 152 | 8.16 | 11 | 7.64 |
|---|
| SatisfactionCustomerSupport | 271 | 8.86 |
16 | 8.56 | 3 | | 0 | | 10 | 8.90 | 0 | | 0 | | 172 | 8.88 | 12 | 8.58 |
|---|
| CompanyLoyalty | 269 | 8.82 |
16 | 8.44 | 3 | | 0 | | 10 | 8.80 | 0 | | 0 | | 171 | 8.88 | 12 | 8.58 |
|---|
| 2023 Survey Results |
| Product: OPALS |
Response Distribution |
Statistics |
|---|
| Category | Responses |
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
Mode | Mean | Median |
|---|
| ILS Satisfaction | 273 |
| | | 2 | | | 1 | 5 | 22 | 243 | 9 | 8.83 | 9 |
|---|
| ILS Functionality | 274 |
| | | | 2 | | 4 | 1 | 76 | 191 | 9 | 8.64 | 9 |
|---|
| Print Functionality | 274 |
| | | | | 1 | 1 | 3 | 14 | 255 | 9 | 8.90 | 9 |
|---|
| Electronic Functionality | 226 |
1 | | | 1 | | 2 | 2 | 41 | 123 | 56 | 8 | 7.96 | 8 |
|---|
| Company Satisfaction | 272 |
| | | 1 | | 1 | | 3 | 28 | 239 | 9 | 8.84 | 9 |
|---|
| Support Satisfaction | 271 |
| | | | | | | 2 | 35 | 234 | 9 | 8.86 | 9 |
|---|
| Support Improvement | 0 |
| | | | | | | | | | 0 | 0.00 | |
|---|
| Company Loyalty | 269 |
| | | | | | 3 | 1 | 37 | 228 | 9 | 8.82 | 9 |
|---|
| Open Source Interest | 82 |
4 | | 6 | 1 | | 1 | 1 | | 1 | 14 | 9 | 8.54 | 10 |
|---|
| Category | Total | Yes | percent |
|---|
| Considering new ILS | 279 |
4 | 1.43% |
|---|
| Considering new Interface | 279 |
0 | 0.00% |
|---|
| System Installed on time? | 279 |
0 | 0.00% |
|---|
| Average Collection size: |
| 108021 |
|---|
| Type | Count |
|---|
| Public | 11 |
|---|
| Academic | 23 |
|---|
| School | 177 |
|---|
| Consortium | 12 |
|---|
| Special | 16 |
|---|
| Size Category | Count |
|---|
| [1] Under 10,000 | 37 |
|---|
| [2] 10,001-100,000 | 192 |
|---|
| [3] 100,001-250,000 | 3 |
|---|
| [4] 250,001-1,000,000 | 12 |
|---|
| [5] 1,000,001-10,000,000 | 7 |
|---|
| [6] over 10,000,001 | 0 |
|---|
| 2022 Survey Results |
| Product: OPALS |
Response Distribution |
Statistics |
|---|
| Category | Responses |
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
Mode | Mean | Median |
|---|
| ILS Satisfaction | 297 |
| | | 1 | | | 1 | 7 | 17 | 271 | 9 | 8.87 | 9 |
|---|
| ILS Functionality | 295 |
| | | | 1 | 2 | 1 | 5 | 61 | 225 | 9 | 8.71 | 9 |
|---|
| Print Functionality | 296 |
| | | | 1 | | 2 | 2 | 19 | 272 | 9 | 8.89 | 9 |
|---|
| Electronic Functionality | 257 |
2 | 1 | 2 | | | 3 | 3 | 41 | 122 | 83 | 8 | 7.97 | 8 |
|---|
| Company Satisfaction | 296 |
| | | | | 3 | 1 | 5 | 20 | 267 | 9 | 8.85 | 9 |
|---|
| Support Satisfaction | 292 |
| | | | 2 | 1 | | 2 | 49 | 238 | 9 | 8.77 | 9 |
|---|
| Support Improvement | 0 |
| | | | | | | | | | 0 | 0.00 | |
|---|
| Company Loyalty | 290 |
2 | 2 | | | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 32 | 248 | 9 | 8.71 | 9 |
|---|
| Open Source Interest | 97 |
4 | 1 | 3 | 1 | | 9 | 1 | 2 | 4 | 24 | 9 | 8.28 | 10 |
|---|
| Category | Total | Yes | percent |
|---|
| Considering new ILS | 297 |
2 | 0.67% |
|---|
| Considering new Interface | 297 |
3 | 1.01% |
|---|
| System Installed on time? | 297 |
0 | 0.00% |
|---|
| Average Collection size: |
| 95676 |
|---|
| Type | Count |
|---|
| Public | 11 |
|---|
| Academic | 29 |
|---|
| School | 182 |
|---|
| Consortium | 10 |
|---|
| Special | 14 |
|---|
| Size Category | Count |
|---|
| [1] Under 10,000 | 50 |
|---|
| [2] 10,001-100,000 | 184 |
|---|
| [3] 100,001-250,000 | 3 |
|---|
| [4] 250,001-1,000,000 | 12 |
|---|
| [5] 1,000,001-10,000,000 | 6 |
|---|
| [6] over 10,000,001 | 0 |
|---|
| 2021 Survey Results |
| Product: OPALS |
Response Distribution |
Statistics |
|---|
| Category | Responses |
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
Mode | Mean | Median |
|---|
| ILS Satisfaction | 252 |
| | | | | 2 | | 2 | 25 | 223 | 9 | 8.85 | 9 |
|---|
| ILS Functionality | 251 |
| | | | | | 3 | 4 | 56 | 188 | 9 | 8.71 | 9 |
|---|
| Print Functionality | 251 |
| | | | | | 1 | 4 | 15 | 231 | 9 | 8.90 | 9 |
|---|
| Electronic Functionality | 204 |
2 | 1 | 2 | | 1 | 2 | 1 | 34 | 97 | 64 | 8 | 7.92 | 8 |
|---|
| Company Satisfaction | 247 |
| | | 1 | | | | 1 | 44 | 201 | 9 | 8.79 | 9 |
|---|
| Support Satisfaction | 250 |
| | 1 | | | | | 1 | 51 | 197 | 9 | 8.76 | 9 |
|---|
| Support Improvement | 0 |
| | | | | | | | | | 0 | 0.00 | |
|---|
| Company Loyalty | 248 |
| | | | 1 | 1 | | 3 | 57 | 186 | 9 | 8.71 | 9 |
|---|
| Open Source Interest | 130 |
4 | 1 | | 2 | | 1 | 1 | 2 | 4 | 55 | 9 | 8.92 | 3 |
|---|
| Category | Total | Yes | percent |
|---|
| Considering new ILS | 253 |
2 | 0.79% |
|---|
| Considering new Interface | 253 |
15 | 5.93% |
|---|
| System Installed on time? | 253 |
0 | 0.00% |
|---|
| Average Collection size: |
| 113901 |
|---|
| Type | Count |
|---|
| Public | 7 |
|---|
| Academic | 30 |
|---|
| School | 95 |
|---|
| Consortium | 8 |
|---|
| Special | 13 |
|---|
| Size Category | Count |
|---|
| [1] Under 10,000 | 37 |
|---|
| [2] 10,001-100,000 | 157 |
|---|
| [3] 100,001-250,000 | 3 |
|---|
| [4] 250,001-1,000,000 | 11 |
|---|
| [5] 1,000,001-10,000,000 | 6 |
|---|
| [6] over 10,000,001 | 0 |
|---|
| 2020 Survey Results |
| Product: OPALS |
Response Distribution |
Statistics |
|---|
| Category | Responses |
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
Mode | Mean | Median |
|---|
| ILS Satisfaction | 259 |
| | | | | | 2 | 7 | 25 | 225 | 9 | 8.83 | 9 |
|---|
| ILS Functionality | 255 |
| | | | | | 1 | 5 | 62 | 187 | 9 | 8.71 | 9 |
|---|
| Print Functionality | 258 |
| | | | | | | 5 | 19 | 234 | 9 | 8.89 | 9 |
|---|
| Electronic Functionality | 245 |
| | 1 | | | 2 | 2 | 49 | 102 | 89 | 8 | 8.10 | 8 |
|---|
| Company Satisfaction | 254 |
| | | | | | 1 | 3 | 36 | 214 | 9 | 8.82 | 9 |
|---|
| Support Satisfaction | 251 |
| | | | | 1 | | 2 | 47 | 201 | 9 | 8.78 | 9 |
|---|
| Support Improvement | 0 |
| | | | | | | | | | 0 | 0.00 | |
|---|
| Company Loyalty | 256 |
1 | | | | | | 1 | 2 | 52 | 200 | 9 | 8.73 | 9 |
|---|
| Open Source Interest | 45 |
6 | | 3 | 2 | 1 | 1 | | 1 | 1 | 16 | 9 | 7.11 | 2 |
|---|
| Category | Total | Yes | percent |
|---|
| Considering new ILS | 261 |
5 | 1.92% |
|---|
| Considering new Interface | 261 |
0 | 0.00% |
|---|
| System Installed on time? | 261 |
0 | 0.00% |
|---|
| Average Collection size: |
| 96991 |
|---|
| Type | Count |
|---|
| Public | 7 |
|---|
| Academic | 26 |
|---|
| School | 165 |
|---|
| Consortium | 8 |
|---|
| Special | 10 |
|---|
| Size Category | Count |
|---|
| [1] Under 10,000 | 40 |
|---|
| [2] 10,001-100,000 | 173 |
|---|
| [3] 100,001-250,000 | 3 |
|---|
| [4] 250,001-1,000,000 | 9 |
|---|
| [5] 1,000,001-10,000,000 | 6 |
|---|
| [6] over 10,000,001 | 0 |
|---|
| 2019 Survey Results |
| Product: OPALS |
Response Distribution |
Statistics |
|---|
| Category | Responses |
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
Mode | Mean | Median |
|---|
| ILS Satisfaction | 283 |
| | | | 2 | 1 | 2 | 12 | 19 | 247 | 9 | 8.78 | 9 |
|---|
| ILS Functionality | 283 |
| | | | 3 | | 3 | 12 | 37 | 228 | 9 | 8.70 | 9 |
|---|
| Print Functionality | 284 |
| | | | 2 | | 1 | 7 | 23 | 251 | 9 | 8.82 | 9 |
|---|
| Electronic Functionality | 227 |
2 | | | | 2 | 3 | 7 | 40 | 93 | 80 | 8 | 7.97 | 8 |
|---|
| Company Satisfaction | 280 |
| | | 1 | 1 | | 2 | 5 | 29 | 242 | 9 | 8.80 | 9 |
|---|
| Support Satisfaction | 282 |
| | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 33 | 239 | 9 | 8.74 | 9 |
|---|
| Support Improvement | 263 |
1 | | | 1 | 4 | 13 | 3 | 13 | 119 | 109 | 8 | 8.08 | 8 |
|---|
| Company Loyalty | 276 |
1 | | | | 2 | 5 | 1 | 4 | 50 | 213 | 9 | 8.64 | 9 |
|---|
| Open Source Interest | 272 |
10 | 2 | 1 | | 5 | 2 | | 4 | 24 | 224 | 9 | 8.35 | 9 |
|---|
| Category | Total | Yes | percent |
|---|
| Considering new ILS | 284 |
1 | 0.35% |
|---|
| Considering new Interface | 284 |
19 | 6.69% |
|---|
| System Installed on time? | 284 |
277 | 97.54% |
|---|
| Average Collection size: |
| 89893 |
|---|
| Type | Count |
|---|
| Public | 7 |
|---|
| Academic | 35 |
|---|
| School | 153 |
|---|
| Consortium | 14 |
|---|
| Special | 12 |
|---|
| Size Category | Count |
|---|
| [1] Under 10,000 | 57 |
|---|
| [2] 10,001-100,000 | 159 |
|---|
| [3] 100,001-250,000 | 1 |
|---|
| [4] 250,001-1,000,000 | 17 |
|---|
| [5] 1,000,001-10,000,000 | 4 |
|---|
| [6] over 10,000,001 | 0 |
|---|
| 2018 Survey Results |
| Product: OPALS |
Response Distribution |
Statistics |
|---|
| Category | Responses |
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
Mode | Mean | Median |
|---|
| ILS Satisfaction | 342 |
| | | | | | 1 | 5 | 15 | 321 | 9 | 8.92 | 9 |
|---|
| ILS Functionality | 340 |
| | | | | 1 | 1 | 5 | 23 | 310 | 9 | 8.88 | 9 |
|---|
| Print Functionality | 339 |
| | | | | | | 5 | 13 | 321 | 9 | 8.93 | 9 |
|---|
| Electronic Functionality | 286 |
| | | | 1 | 3 | 2 | 38 | 124 | 118 | 8 | 8.22 | 8 |
|---|
| Company Satisfaction | 338 |
| | | | | | 1 | 2 | 17 | 318 | 9 | 8.93 | 9 |
|---|
| Support Satisfaction | 341 |
| | | | | | 1 | 3 | 21 | 316 | 9 | 8.91 | 9 |
|---|
| Support Improvement | 333 |
| | | | 2 | 4 | 4 | 22 | 143 | 158 | 9 | 8.32 | 8 |
|---|
| Company Loyalty | 340 |
1 | | | 1 | | | 2 | 2 | 49 | 285 | 9 | 8.78 | 9 |
|---|
| Open Source Interest | 325 |
2 | | 3 | | 2 | 1 | | | 47 | 270 | 9 | 8.69 | 9 |
|---|
| Category | Total | Yes | percent |
|---|
| Considering new ILS | 342 |
0 | 0.00% |
|---|
| Considering new Interface | 342 |
65 | 19.01% |
|---|
| System Installed on time? | 342 |
339 | 99.12% |
|---|
| Average Collection size: |
| 102512 |
|---|
| Type | Count |
|---|
| Public | 10 |
|---|
| Academic | 30 |
|---|
| School | 205 |
|---|
| Consortium | 16 |
|---|
| Special | 17 |
|---|
| Size Category | Count |
|---|
| [1] Under 10,000 | 66 |
|---|
| [2] 10,001-100,000 | 207 |
|---|
| [3] 100,001-250,000 | 3 |
|---|
| [4] 250,001-1,000,000 | 15 |
|---|
| [5] 1,000,001-10,000,000 | 8 |
|---|
| [6] over 10,000,001 | 0 |
|---|
| 2017 Survey Results |
| Product: OPALS |
Response Distribution |
Statistics |
|---|
| Category | Responses |
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
Mode | Mean | Median |
|---|
| ILS Satisfaction | 261 |
| | | | | 1 | 3 | 6 | 13 | 238 | 9 | 8.85 | 9 |
|---|
| ILS Functionality | 259 |
| | | | 1 | | 4 | 8 | 15 | 231 | 9 | 8.81 | 9 |
|---|
| Print Functionality | 260 |
| | | | | | 3 | 6 | 8 | 243 | 9 | 8.89 | 9 |
|---|
| Electronic Functionality | 220 |
| | | | | 4 | 2 | 51 | 84 | 79 | 8 | 8.05 | 8 |
|---|
| Company Satisfaction | 259 |
| | | | | 1 | 3 | 2 | 15 | 238 | 9 | 8.88 | 9 |
|---|
| Support Satisfaction | 261 |
| | | | | | 2 | 4 | 25 | 230 | 9 | 8.85 | 9 |
|---|
| Support Improvement | 245 |
| | | | 1 | 10 | 2 | 19 | 111 | 102 | 8 | 8.18 | 8 |
|---|
| Company Loyalty | 254 |
| | | | 2 | 2 | 2 | 5 | 32 | 211 | 9 | 8.74 | 9 |
|---|
| Open Source Interest | 256 |
4 | 2 | | | | 2 | 3 | 1 | 43 | 201 | 9 | 8.55 | 9 |
|---|
| Category | Total | Yes | percent |
|---|
| Considering new ILS | 263 |
0 | 0.00% |
|---|
| Considering new Interface | 263 |
3 | 1.14% |
|---|
| System Installed on time? | 263 |
259 | 98.48% |
|---|
| Average Collection size: |
| 78904 |
|---|
| Type | Count |
|---|
| Public | 9 |
|---|
| Academic | 23 |
|---|
| School | 165 |
|---|
| Consortium | 8 |
|---|
| Special | 12 |
|---|
| Size Category | Count |
|---|
| [1] Under 10,000 | 69 |
|---|
| [2] 10,001-100,000 | 157 |
|---|
| [3] 100,001-250,000 | 0 |
|---|
| [4] 250,001-1,000,000 | 9 |
|---|
| [5] 1,000,001-10,000,000 | 5 |
|---|
| [6] over 10,000,001 | 0 |
|---|
| 2016 Survey Results |
| Product: OPALS |
Response Distribution |
Statistics |
|---|
| Category | Responses |
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
Mode | Mean | Median |
|---|
| ILS Satisfaction | 218 |
| 1 | | 2 | 1 | 3 | 3 | 8 | 27 | 173 | 9 | 8.59 | 9 |
|---|
| ILS Functionality | 218 |
| | 1 | 2 | | 5 | 3 | 10 | 33 | 164 | 9 | 8.54 | 9 |
|---|
| Print Functionality | 218 |
| | | | 1 | 2 | 7 | 9 | 21 | 178 | 9 | 8.67 | 9 |
|---|
| Electronic Functionality | 187 |
1 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 4 | 47 | 80 | 46 | 8 | 7.67 | 8 |
|---|
| Company Satisfaction | 219 |
| 3 | | 1 | | 3 | 2 | 11 | 21 | 178 | 9 | 8.58 | 9 |
|---|
| Support Satisfaction | 215 |
| 2 | | | 2 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 28 | 174 | 9 | 8.63 | 9 |
|---|
| Support Improvement | 204 |
| 1 | | | 4 | 17 | 9 | 54 | 59 | 60 | 9 | 7.58 | 8 |
|---|
| Company Loyalty | 215 |
2 | 1 | | | 1 | 3 | 3 | 7 | 38 | 160 | 9 | 8.52 | 9 |
|---|
| Open Source Interest | 209 |
13 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 1 | | 2 | 44 | 142 | 9 | 7.99 | 9 |
|---|
| Category | Total | Yes | percent |
|---|
| Considering new ILS | 220 |
3 | 1.36% |
|---|
| Considering new Interface | 220 |
3 | 1.36% |
|---|
| System Installed on time? | 220 |
214 | 97.27% |
|---|
| Average Collection size: |
| 70386 |
|---|
| Type | Count |
|---|
| Public | 7 |
|---|
| Academic | 12 |
|---|
| School | 150 |
|---|
| Consortium | 8 |
|---|
| Special | 11 |
|---|
| Size Category | Count |
|---|
| [1] Under 10,000 | 74 |
|---|
| [2] 10,001-100,000 | 117 |
|---|
| [3] 100,001-250,000 | 1 |
|---|
| [4] 250,001-1,000,000 | 11 |
|---|
| [5] 1,000,001-10,000,000 | 4 |
|---|
| [6] over 10,000,001 | 0 |
|---|
| 2015 Survey Results |
| Product: OPALS |
Response Distribution |
Statistics |
|---|
| Category | Responses |
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
Mode | Mean | Median |
|---|
| ILS Satisfaction | 207 |
| | | | 2 | 4 | 3 | 12 | 27 | 159 | 9 | 8.58 | 9 |
|---|
| ILS Functionality | 208 |
| | | | 2 | 4 | 2 | 15 | 37 | 148 | 9 | 8.52 | 9 |
|---|
| Print Functionality | 207 |
| | | | | 4 | 6 | 7 | 30 | 160 | 9 | 8.62 | 9 |
|---|
| Electronic Functionality | 180 |
2 | 1 | | 1 | 3 | 1 | 9 | 26 | 47 | 90 | 9 | 8.02 | 9 |
|---|
| Company Satisfaction | 208 |
| 1 | | 1 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 5 | 18 | 177 | 9 | 8.69 | 9 |
|---|
| Support Satisfaction | 203 |
| | 3 | | | 2 | 2 | 3 | 21 | 172 | 9 | 8.69 | 9 |
|---|
| Support Improvement | 191 |
| | 1 | | 3 | 18 | 5 | 9 | 61 | 94 | 9 | 8.02 | 8 |
|---|
| Company Loyalty | 205 |
2 | | 1 | | 1 | 5 | 3 | 4 | 26 | 163 | 9 | 8.55 | 9 |
|---|
| Open Source Interest | 185 |
10 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 4 | 5 | 2 | 7 | 8 | 146 | 9 | 8.03 | 9 |
|---|
| Category | Total | Yes | percent |
|---|
| Considering new ILS | 214 |
5 | 2.34% |
|---|
| Considering new Interface | 214 |
52 | 24.30% |
|---|
| System Installed on time? | 214 |
205 | 95.79% |
|---|
| Average Collection size: |
| 126100 |
|---|
| Type | Count |
|---|
| Public | 6 |
|---|
| Academic | 12 |
|---|
| School | 140 |
|---|
| Consortium | 18 |
|---|
| Special | 11 |
|---|
| Size Category | Count |
|---|
| [1] Under 10,000 | 81 |
|---|
| [2] 10,001-100,000 | 93 |
|---|
| [3] 100,001-250,000 | 2 |
|---|
| [4] 250,001-1,000,000 | 14 |
|---|
| [5] 1,000,001-10,000,000 | 6 |
|---|
| [6] over 10,000,001 | 0 |
|---|
| 2014 Survey Results |
| Product: OPALS |
Response Distribution |
Statistics |
|---|
| Category | Responses |
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
Mode | Mean | Median |
|---|
| ILS Satisfaction | 129 |
| | | 1 | 2 | | 5 | 6 | 24 | 91 | 9 | 8.48 | 9 |
|---|
| ILS Functionality | 130 |
| | | 1 | 1 | 3 | 7 | 11 | 32 | 75 | 9 | 8.25 | 9 |
|---|
| Print Functionality | 130 |
| | | 1 | 1 | 1 | 5 | 6 | 20 | 96 | 9 | 8.52 | 9 |
|---|
| Electronic Functionality | 108 |
1 | 1 | | 1 | 6 | 3 | 5 | 20 | 38 | 33 | 8 | 7.54 | 8 |
|---|
| Company Satisfaction | 129 |
| 1 | | 1 | | 1 | 1 | 1 | 21 | 103 | 9 | 8.66 | 9 |
|---|
| Support Satisfaction | 128 |
| 1 | | 1 | 1 | | 1 | 1 | 19 | 104 | 9 | 8.66 | 9 |
|---|
| Support Improvement | 123 |
| 1 | | | 1 | 9 | 7 | 12 | 42 | 51 | 9 | 7.89 | 8 |
|---|
| Company Loyalty | 128 |
1 | 1 | | | 1 | 2 | 1 | 5 | 16 | 101 | 9 | 8.54 | 9 |
|---|
| Open Source Interest | 115 |
7 | 3 | 1 | | | 2 | 3 | | 17 | 82 | 9 | 7.89 | 9 |
|---|
| Category | Total | Yes | percent |
|---|
| Considering new ILS | 131 |
3 | 2.29% |
|---|
| Considering new Interface | 131 |
7 | 5.34% |
|---|
| System Installed on time? | 131 |
127 | 96.95% |
|---|
| Average Collection size: |
| 74910 |
|---|
| Type | Count |
|---|
| Public | 3 |
|---|
| Academic | 7 |
|---|
| School | 87 |
|---|
| Consortium | 8 |
|---|
| Special | 4 |
|---|
| Size Category | Count |
|---|
| [1] Under 10,000 | 45 |
|---|
| [2] 10,001-100,000 | 65 |
|---|
| [3] 100,001-250,000 | 0 |
|---|
| [4] 250,001-1,000,000 | 4 |
|---|
| [5] 1,000,001-10,000,000 | 3 |
|---|
| [6] over 10,000,001 | 0 |
|---|
| 2013 Survey Results |
| Product: OPALS |
Response Distribution |
Statistics |
|---|
| Category | Responses |
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
Mode | Mean | Median |
|---|
| ILS Satisfaction | 213 |
| | | | | 1 | 4 | 11 | 26 | 171 | 9 | 8.70 | 9 |
|---|
| ILS Functionality | 213 |
| | | | | 3 | 4 | 14 | 38 | 154 | 9 | 8.58 | 9 |
|---|
| Print Functionality | 213 |
| | | | | | 4 | 7 | 28 | 174 | 9 | 8.75 | 9 |
|---|
| Electronic Functionality | 176 |
| | | | 3 | 3 | 7 | 12 | 59 | 92 | 9 | 8.26 | 9 |
|---|
| Company Satisfaction | 212 |
| | | | | 1 | 2 | 5 | 20 | 184 | 9 | 8.81 | 9 |
|---|
| Support Satisfaction | 212 |
| | | | | 4 | 2 | 3 | 17 | 186 | 9 | 8.79 | 9 |
|---|
| Support Improvement | 196 |
| | | | 1 | 12 | 2 | 6 | 44 | 131 | 9 | 8.41 | 9 |
|---|
| Company Loyalty | 208 |
1 | | | | 1 | 3 | | 5 | 16 | 182 | 9 | 8.75 | 9 |
|---|
| Open Source Interest | 196 |
13 | 1 | | | 2 | 2 | | 4 | 8 | 166 | 9 | 8.19 | 9 |
|---|
| Category | Total | Yes | percent |
|---|
| Considering new ILS | 215 |
1 | 0.47% |
|---|
| Considering new Interface | 215 |
0 | 0.00% |
|---|
| System Installed on time? | 215 |
205 | 95.35% |
|---|
| Average Collection size: |
| 22577 |
|---|
| Type | Count |
|---|
| Public | 2 |
|---|
| Academic | 5 |
|---|
| School | 173 |
|---|
| Consortium | 4 |
|---|
| Special | 9 |
|---|
| Size Category | Count |
|---|
| [1] Under 10,000 | 74 |
|---|
| [2] 10,001-100,000 | 102 |
|---|
| [3] 100,001-250,000 | 1 |
|---|
| [4] 250,001-1,000,000 | 2 |
|---|
| [5] 1,000,001-10,000,000 | 0 |
|---|
| [6] over 10,000,001 | 0 |
|---|
| 2012 Survey Results |
| Product: OPALS |
Response Distribution |
Statistics |
|---|
| Category | Responses |
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
Mode | Mean | Median |
|---|
| ILS Satisfaction | 186 |
| | 1 | 1 | | 1 | 1 | 9 | 30 | 143 | 9 | 8.63 | 9 |
|---|
| ILS Functionality | 186 |
| | | | | 3 | 3 | 13 | 45 | 122 | 9 | 8.51 | 9 |
|---|
| Print Functionality | 0 |
| | | | | | | | | | 0 | 0.00 | |
|---|
| Electronic Functionality | 0 |
| | | | | | | | | | 0 | 0.00 | |
|---|
| Company Satisfaction | 186 |
| | 1 | | | 1 | 1 | 3 | 25 | 155 | 9 | 8.76 | 9 |
|---|
| Support Satisfaction | 184 |
| | 1 | 2 | | | 1 | 5 | 23 | 152 | 9 | 8.70 | 9 |
|---|
| Support Improvement | 168 |
| | 1 | | 1 | 16 | 5 | 5 | 36 | 104 | 9 | 8.18 | 9 |
|---|
| Company Loyalty | 177 |
| 1 | 1 | | 1 | | 2 | 4 | 16 | 152 | 9 | 8.72 | 9 |
|---|
| Open Source Interest | 170 |
6 | | 2 | | 3 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 13 | 140 | 9 | 8.32 | 9 |
|---|
| Category | Total | Yes | percent |
|---|
| Considering new ILS | 187 |
2 | 1.07% |
|---|
| Considering new Interface | 187 |
0 | 0.00% |
|---|
| System Installed on time? | 187 |
184 | 98.40% |
|---|
| Average Collection size: |
| 62626 |
|---|
| Type | Count |
|---|
| Public | 4 |
|---|
| Academic | 4 |
|---|
| School | 136 |
|---|
| Consortium | 8 |
|---|
| Special | 12 |
|---|
| Size Category | Count |
|---|
| [1] Under 10,000 | 78 |
|---|
| [2] 10,001-100,000 | 85 |
|---|
| [3] 100,001-250,000 | 2 |
|---|
| [4] 250,001-1,000,000 | 6 |
|---|
| [5] 1,000,001-10,000,000 | 2 |
|---|
| [6] over 10,000,001 | 0 |
|---|
| 2011 Survey Results |
| Product: OPALS |
Response Distribution |
Statistics |
|---|
| Category | Responses |
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
Mode | Mean | Median |
|---|
| ILS Satisfaction | 79 |
| | | | 1 | 3 | 2 | 7 | 26 | 40 | 9 | 8.20 | 9 |
|---|
| ILS Functionality | 79 |
| | | | 1 | 2 | 5 | 19 | 17 | 35 | 9 | 7.95 | 8 |
|---|
| Print Functionality | 0 |
| | | | | | | | | | 0 | 0.00 | |
|---|
| Electronic Functionality | 0 |
| | | | | | | | | | 0 | 0.00 | |
|---|
| Company Satisfaction | 80 |
| | | | | 1 | 1 | 7 | 23 | 48 | 9 | 8.45 | 9 |
|---|
| Support Satisfaction | 80 |
| | 1 | | 1 | | 3 | 6 | 19 | 50 | 9 | 8.35 | 9 |
|---|
| Support Improvement | 75 |
| | | | 1 | 9 | 4 | 5 | 28 | 28 | 8 | 7.79 | 8 |
|---|
| Company Loyalty | 78 |
| | | | 2 | 1 | 4 | 2 | 12 | 57 | 9 | 8.46 | 9 |
|---|
| Open Source Interest | 52 |
6 | | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | | 1 | 1 | 38 | 9 | 7.31 | 9 |
|---|
| Category | Total | Yes | percent |
|---|
| Considering new ILS | 81 |
1 | 1.23% |
|---|
| Considering new Interface | 81 |
0 | 0.00% |
|---|
| System Installed on time? | 81 |
78 | 96.30% |
|---|
| Average Collection size: |
| 89790 |
|---|
| Type | Count |
|---|
| Public | 0 |
|---|
| Academic | 1 |
|---|
| School | 57 |
|---|
| Consortium | 7 |
|---|
| Special | 4 |
|---|
| Size Category | Count |
|---|
| [1] Under 10,000 | 33 |
|---|
| [2] 10,001-100,000 | 33 |
|---|
| [3] 100,001-250,000 | 2 |
|---|
| [4] 250,001-1,000,000 | 4 |
|---|
| [5] 1,000,001-10,000,000 | 1 |
|---|
| [6] over 10,000,001 | 0 |
|---|
| 2010 Survey Results |
| Product: OPALS |
Response Distribution |
Statistics |
|---|
| Category | Responses |
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
Mode | Mean | Median |
|---|
| ILS Satisfaction | 100 |
| | | | | 2 | 1 | 13 | 20 | 64 | 9 | 8.43 | 9 |
|---|
| ILS Functionality | 0 |
| | | | | | | | | | 0 | 0.00 | |
|---|
| Print Functionality | 0 |
| | | | | | | | | | 0 | 0.00 | |
|---|
| Electronic Functionality | 0 |
| | | | | | | | | | 0 | 0.00 | |
|---|
| Company Satisfaction | 100 |
| | | | | | 3 | 7 | 14 | 76 | 9 | 8.63 | 9 |
|---|
| Support Satisfaction | 99 |
| | | | | | 1 | 5 | 11 | 82 | 9 | 8.76 | 9 |
|---|
| Support Improvement | 96 |
| | | | 1 | 9 | 2 | 3 | 17 | 64 | 9 | 8.27 | 9 |
|---|
| Company Loyalty | 99 |
| | | 1 | 1 | 1 | | 3 | 8 | 85 | 9 | 8.71 | 9 |
|---|
| Open Source Interest | 98 |
5 | 1 | | | | 2 | | 2 | 2 | 86 | 9 | 8.32 | 9 |
|---|
| Category | Total | Yes | percent |
|---|
| Considering new ILS | 106 |
2 | 1.89% |
|---|
| Considering new Interface | 106 |
2 | 1.89% |
|---|
| System Installed on time? | 106 |
97 | 91.51% |
|---|
| Average Collection size: |
| 49191 |
|---|
| Type | Count |
|---|
| Public | 0 |
|---|
| Academic | 1 |
|---|
| School | 90 |
|---|
| Consortium | 6 |
|---|
| Special | 4 |
|---|
| Size Category | Count |
|---|
| [1] Under 10,000 | 35 |
|---|
| [2] 10,001-100,000 | 53 |
|---|
| [3] 100,001-250,000 | 0 |
|---|
| [4] 250,001-1,000,000 | 3 |
|---|
| [5] 1,000,001-10,000,000 | 1 |
|---|
| [6] over 10,000,001 | 0 |
|---|
| 2009 Survey Results |
| Product: OPALS |
Response Distribution |
Statistics |
|---|
| Category | Responses |
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
Mode | Mean | Median |
|---|
| ILS Satisfaction | 42 |
1 | | | 1 | 1 | 1 | | 12 | 8 | 18 | 9 | 7.67 | 8 |
|---|
| ILS Functionality | 0 |
| | | | | | | | | | 0 | 0.00 | |
|---|
| Print Functionality | 0 |
| | | | | | | | | | 0 | 0.00 | |
|---|
| Electronic Functionality | 0 |
| | | | | | | | | | 0 | 0.00 | |
|---|
| Company Satisfaction | 42 |
1 | | | 1 | 1 | 1 | | 5 | 11 | 22 | 9 | 7.93 | 9 |
|---|
| Support Satisfaction | 42 |
1 | | | | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 10 | 25 | 9 | 8.12 | 9 |
|---|
| Support Improvement | 42 |
2 | | | | | 9 | 2 | 5 | 7 | 17 | 9 | 7.17 | 8 |
|---|
| Company Loyalty | 42 |
2 | 1 | | | | 1 | | 1 | 10 | 27 | 9 | 8.00 | 9 |
|---|
| Open Source Interest | 34 |
4 | 1 | | 2 | | 4 | | | | 23 | 9 | 6.88 | 9 |
|---|
| Category | Total | Yes | percent |
|---|
| Considering new ILS | 42 |
0 | 0.00% |
|---|
| Considering new Interface | 42 |
0 | 0.00% |
|---|
| System Installed on time? | 42 |
37 | 88.10% |
|---|
| 5 Responses for OPALS in 2008 |
| 3 Responses for OPALS in 2007 |
2024 : gen: 8.82 company 8.82 loyalty 8.79 support 8.77
2023 : gen: 8.83 company 8.84 loyalty 8.82 support 8.86
2022 : gen: 8.87 company 8.85 loyalty 8.71 support 8.77
2021 : gen: 8.85 company 8.79 loyalty 8.71 support 8.76
2020 : gen: 8.83 company 8.82 loyalty 8.73 support 8.78
2019 : gen: 8.78 company 8.80 loyalty 8.64 support 8.74
2018 : gen: 8.92 company 8.93 loyalty 8.78 support 8.91
2017 : gen: 8.85 company 8.88 loyalty 8.74 support 8.85
2016 : gen: 8.59 company 8.58 loyalty 8.52 support 8.63
2015 : gen: 8.58 company 8.69 loyalty 8.55 support 8.69
2014 : gen: 8.48 company 8.66 loyalty 8.54 support 8.66
2013 : gen: 8.70 company 8.81 loyalty 8.75 support 8.79
2012 : gen: 8.63 company 8.76 loyalty 8.72 support 8.70
2011 : gen: 8.20 company 8.45 loyalty 8.46 support 8.35
2010 : gen: 8.43 company 8.63 loyalty 8.71 support 8.76
2009 : gen: 7.67 company 7.93 loyalty 8.00 support 8.12
Comments (survey2023)
OPALS is a great value for the price and includes value-added features such as modules for Pathfinders and equipment. Plus, its homepage is very customizable; and the system is fairly easy to use. However, it has some drawbacks for academic libraries. First, its language for placing a hold is "reserve," which staff and patrons easily confuse with library reserves; [...] and it does not exclude reference items or other items that cannot be placed on hold by policy. Third, data integrity is questionable since our last inventory experience, which somehow reactivated 100-200 deleted items. Fourth, its searching almost always involves automatic truncation (even of phrases), making it difficult to narrow down searches. Fifth, OPALS does not seem to handle mass purges of electronic resources; deleting electronic subscription titles may take careful strategies. It seems better designed for school libraries. But we probably will not migrate to a new system for a few years because of cost and other projects. We are satisfied with OPALS in general. OPALS meets our most important needs very well. Plus, OPALS technical support is very responsive and usually very helpful.
(Library type: Academic; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 7)
We don't use our ILS to manage our electronic resources. We use LibGuides to do that.
(Library type: School; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 9)
We are a small library within a community hospital, so OPALS fulfils our current needs. Customer service has always been excellent through Bibliofiche (do not contact Media Flex, Inc. directly), and the price fits our budget.
(Library type: Medical; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 8)
MediaFlex is FABULOUS!!!!! The quality of the support team is outstanding!
(Library type: Special; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)
This system has served our students and teachers well.
(Library type: Theology; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)
This is my retirement year. Our K-12 school library has used OPALS since 2008 during which the system has evolved to manage and access digital resources including database authentication and discovery searching. The support staff has been outstanding.
(Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)
MediaFlex's customer service is unparalled. Help desk questions are answered immediately and thoroughly, and additional functionality has been added literally hours after a request.
(Library type: School; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 9)
Our library is totally satisfied with OPALS Mediaflex and its functionalities. It has a wide range of features, easy to use by admin and students. It is kid-friendly and its customer support is excellent. Our library does not even need to have a separate website as OPALS Mediaflex is enough to cater all our library needs.
(Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)
Opals is wonderful and the team the services it even better!
(Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)
OPALS by Mediaflex has the best service in the field of ILS. I've been an enthusiastic user since 2007, and three libraries later I continue to bring OPALS to my school. It is simple to use, fast to set up and has all of the bells and whistles you'd expect from a major player in the field, with a much better price tag. Although I rarely have to reach out for support, you reach a human very easily via email or phone. The OPALS family is a terrific group of folks who care about the customer. They are constantly taking users ideas to upgrade and continue to adjust with the current needs of a small, medium or a large school, university, or even a private library. OPALS makes my job so much easier. Thank you so much! Their years of excellent ratings on this survey proves time over time, they are simply THE BEST!
(Library type: School; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 9)
In 2023 we migrated from a non-MARC product to a MARC product. The data migration was less than clean since the non-MARC product didn't really allow for migration at all! The export CSV file didn't include many essential data fields -- pagination for one.
(Library type: Special; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)
I and my elementary Media Specialist colleagues are extremely happy with the OPALS automation system in our libraries. The search interface is very child friendly with a simple, yet colorful search screen. My young student volunteers easily manage check outs and returns with little guidance. I love using all of the Administration Reports/Tools available to me to improve my library catalog and my library collection. The customer support is extremely responsive, friendly, respectful and always willing to help me, from the President to the technicians. They offer free Professional Development to demonstrate new features or to explain how to use older features. I could not give a greater endorsement to the OPALS product or team.
(Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)
I am very happy with the OPALS automated system in my school's library. The owner, Harry Chan, has delivered helpful seminars during our professional development days for our district's media specialists. He also posts how-to videos on YouTube. Harry has always been kind, courteous, efficient and knowledgeable.
(Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 8)
Outstanding service! I am just in awe at how amazing the OPALS team is! They even help us solve our hardware problems.
(Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)
We have used this system for 16 years. It is updated every year and the service is direct, personal and competent.
(Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)
The system manages diverse media formats well. The library portal and catalog have recorded several million visits and queries.
(Library type: Special; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 9)
Excellent system support and digital resources integration.
(Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)
We serve elementary school students. Our system interface is so easy for our students to use. Even early grade kids can make reserve requests!
(Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)
Our students love using the library system, which works very well. We love the technical support team. We can actually talk to them, and never have to wait on hold and listen to elevator music.
(Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)
We appreciate this system and its outstanding support.
(Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)
We receive outstanding support from our regional library consortium and the program developers. They have integrated our catalog OPAC and subscription database authentication enabling students to search the catalog and database resources simultaneously.
(Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)
OPALS is a sustainable, comprehensive, well supported ILS.
(Library type: Theology; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)
This is a renovation year for us. OPALS and tech support helped us maintain services by managing the collection's temporary locations.
(Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)
We have used open source software since 2016. The program manages our library well and now integrates information database authentication and discovery searching. System support is very responsive even though we are 13,000 km away from their service centre! We highly recommend this system to college libraries in our region.
(Library type: Theology; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 9)
We are reviewing other products only to correlate their features - not because of any dissatisfaction with OPALS. We are extremely happy with OPALS, but we just want to see what other features are offering.
(Library type: Consortium; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 9)
We are not looking to move to a different automation system, but we are reviewing what features are offered by other vendors and software to see what options are available.
(Library type: State; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 9)
We switched to OPALS sixteen years ago. This is the longest school management technology relationship for us. Frequent program updates and courteous, responsive support keep us loyal to this team!
(Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)
The survey responses need to include "Not applicable". Our library is in a small community with potentially 300 users. Our management needs are limited to cataloging print resources; we do not have any electronic resources. We do not manage circulation through the system. We have not had reason to contact ILS for years. The system administration tools are not particularly intuitive but a way to work around them can generally be found.
(Library type: Other; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 7)
We have been using OPALS in our library for 14 years ans remain satisfied with the system and customer support.
(Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)
Our small specialized library serves a highly literate, progressive community. This system provides academic library research level services at a sustainable cost. We appreciate the attentive service of this open source community.
(Library type: Church; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 9)
We love this system. Service is provided by our regional library consortium in collaboration with the developer. This year, hosting services were transferred to the vendor. The transition was painless. Updates are timely, especially the option to anonymize loans as soon as books are returned.
(Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)
Have used OPALS since 2008. Our regional education consortium hosts and supports the system. Technical support is excellent and the annual software updates and portal / library Web page utilities enable us to provide our students and faculty 24/7 access to print, digital resources and streaming video resources; much of which were not available 15 years ago. We use all of the system's reports, Pathfinders and library portal widgets to assist our faculty teaching and student learning. Our consortium arranges users' meetings with the developer whose representatives present updates, listen to our suggestions which usually turn up in system upgrades three to six months later!
(Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)
Excellent system and technical support. This past year, we implemented OPALS single sign on database access and discovery search that links OPAC searching with those resources.
(Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)
This program and its community rocks!
(Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)
We migrated to OPALS just before the pandemic. The data transfer was efficient and the training done by an experienced librarian. During the pandemic, the company updated the software enabling students and parents to book resources and pickup dates and to manage returned resource quarantine. We also implemented their SSO and discovery searching supporting remote learning with reliable resources.
(Library type: School; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 9)
We continue to give this system the highest marks. Our suggestions are actually implemented, they allow us to communicate with their programmers! Tech support staff are calm, friendly, know who and where we are and usually answer our questions in less than 30 minutes.
(Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)
Nous restons très satisfaits d'OPALS et du support technique que nous recevons de la compagnie!
(Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)
Students and faculty use the library resources throughout the day and into the night. eBooks and video streaming resources are accessed using the system's discovery search and authentication SSO. Our library also manages a range of equipment: projectors, laptops, etc.
(Library type: Academic; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 9)
Opals and the company support team have been such a great fit for our school library!
(Library type: School; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 9)
Our school district manages a central book and resources depot servicing teachers in 13 schools. Techers can choose desired instructional resources and book them for delivery on selected dates. We have used OPALS for 17 years and it has kept pace with media format changes along the way.
(Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)
[...]
(Library type: School; collection size: large; ils satisfaction: 9)
OPALS has been a reliable library system for our small college library. It is updated every year and technical support is outstandng.
(Library type: Theology; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)
Our elementary school students use OPAC interfaces designed for them. Our OPALS has two kids interfaces for k3 and 3-5 students. They also have SSO access to databases and a discovery search. It's amazing to watch them use the system to explore the collection!
(Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)
We moved from another system just over a year ago. We are now having to cope with a great system and awesome service.
(Library type: Government Agency; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)
We are located in Oceana. We have been using OPALS for 10 years. The service is reliable. Our young students. like to use the interfaces designed for them and teachers assemble reading resources for their classes using the advanced search option. We do not yet have access to digital resources.
(Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)
Our union catalog manages inter library loan services for over 70 libraries in this region.
(Library type: School; collection size: large; ils satisfaction: 9)
We continue to be satisfied with OPALS after 15 years. This is a community where we can request changes that the developers actually implement; even culturally sensitive changes.
(Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)
Our library returned to OPALS two years ago. We appreciate the system and services. The system now manages our eBook and print collection.
(Library type: Theology; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 9)
Our union catalog manages interlibrary loan transactions and serves as a useful collection development cataloging resource for the branches.
(Library type: Consortium; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 9)
Our community serves multilingual families. OPALS handles non-Roman alphabet characters enabling us to catalog in both languages. The portal features make it possible to feature online services to young children, adolescents and adults. The system works very well for us and the service is outstanding.
(Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)
We work with a range of younger students. This system has OPAC interfaces that K-3 students can use, an interface for intermediate level students, and one that teachers and parents can use for more advanced research. The circulation system has features designed to efficiently process busy class library visits. Their attention to elementary school libraries is so appreciated here.
(Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)
This is an amazing community. We are a small rural school. We had to rebuild our school library after a fire. A colleague recommended we contact OPALS who provided the system, numerous training sessions by a professional librarian (at no cost), and uploaded our Mackin provided MARC records.
(Library type: School; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 9)
Post pandemic service is still quarantined! If every vendor and company we deal with responded as in-depth and quickly as OPALS, our lives would be much easier!
(Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)
We are building a college library to serve students enrolled in our growing technical and vocational programs. This system provides a standards based library application that other colleges have used to manage their digital and video streaming resources; a place to which we aspire.
(Library type: Academic; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 9)
Our library community has evolved over the past 12 years. This program has kept pace with those changes and brought new ideas and resources to our learning community.
(Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)
We discovered OPALS four years ago. We switched just prior to the pandemic; a transition that was painless. They developed special services at that time, and have been helpful with system updates since. We are not a large institution. but we receive gold standard service.
(Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)
We are have used this system for 17 years. We serve a multilingual (English, French, Hebrew) elementary school student population and manage approximately 16,000 transactions a year. Our young students use the the OPAC which handles approximately 3,300 queries per school year. The latest updates include an OPAC search report listing and analyzing search queries that do not link to the students or teachers. This enables us to know our community's current search interests and historical analysis enables us to prepare for cyclical research trends in a school setting.
(Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)
We needed to find a new library system. The OPALS reports here and elsewhere seemed too good to be true. This is only our first year and so far, the transfer was painless, tutoring by library professionals was outstanding, and we've already received system updates. We look forward to letting you know how the second year plays out.
(Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)
I cannot say enough how great OPALS is for us. The ease of use and responsiveness of their team is excellent. I have used two other school library automation programs but OPALS is the best.
(Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)