Library Technology Guides

Documents, Databases, News, and Commentary

Select another Product Report:

Statistical Report for Polaris


2024 Survey Results
Product: Polaris Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction91 1 3 2 9 21 35 20 87.538
ILS Functionality91 1 1 3 2 6 28 31 19 87.458
Print Functionality91 1 4 4 13 37 32 87.958
Electronic Functionality90 1 3 4 3 6 9 11 25 18 10 76.277
Company Satisfaction90 1 2 4 2 7 10 17 31 16 87.018
Support Satisfaction90 2 3 3 1 9 8 16 26 22 87.008
Support Improvement0 00.00
Company Loyalty91 2 2 4 3 7 5 16 27 25 87.108
Open Source Interest85 27 9 4 7 4 11 3 8 3 4 03.452

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS93 77.53%
Considering new Interface93 66.45%
System Installed on time?93 00.00%

Average Collection size: 676475

TypeCount
Public71
Academic5
School1
Consortium10
Special0

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,0002
[2] 10,001-100,00028
[3] 100,001-250,00025
[4] 250,001-1,000,00021
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,00012
[6] over 10,000,0010


Statistics according to type and size categories

The following table presents the 2023 results according to the type and size of the library.

2023 Polaris Responses by Sector
PolarisallAcademicPublicSchoolConsortium
smallmediumlargesmallmediumlarge
navgnavgnavgnavgnavgnavgnavgnavgnavg
SatisfactionLevelILS1347.36 310637.65287.43126.831146.21
ILSFunctionality1337.44 310627.63287.57126.751146.93
PrintFunctionality1337.84 310638.03287.89117.551147.07
ElectronicFunctionality1336.32 310636.73286.07126.581144.71
SatisfactionCustomerSupport1306.89 310627.16287.04126.750145.43
CompanyLoyalty1316.90 310637.02277.41127.331134.92



2023 Survey Results
Product: Polaris Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction134 2 3 2 3 12 41 48 23 87.368
ILS Functionality133 1 1 6 14 42 46 23 87.448
Print Functionality133 1 3 6 29 61 33 87.848
Electronic Functionality133 3 1 6 5 9 12 31 19 26 21 66.326
Company Satisfaction133 1 3 7 3 12 14 41 33 19 76.817
Support Satisfaction130 1 4 7 2 13 13 32 31 27 76.897
Support Improvement0 00.00
Company Loyalty131 5 1 3 1 1 15 17 19 41 28 86.908
Open Source Interest125 36 10 14 10 7 25 4 8 3 4 03.212

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS137 53.65%
Considering new Interface137 00.00%
System Installed on time?137 00.00%

Average Collection size: 558515

TypeCount
Public113
Academic4
School1
Consortium14
Special0

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,0002
[2] 10,001-100,00046
[3] 100,001-250,00028
[4] 250,001-1,000,00032
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,00021
[6] over 10,000,0010



2022 Survey Results
Product: Polaris Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction163 1 1 4 3 2 14 55 46 37 77.408
ILS Functionality162 4 2 4 15 44 55 38 87.538
Print Functionality162 1 1 4 10 34 58 54 87.878
Electronic Functionality161 3 5 7 12 8 17 24 43 23 19 76.047
Company Satisfaction161 1 2 4 5 14 24 38 35 38 77.077
Support Satisfaction157 1 3 4 7 14 18 31 44 35 87.068
Support Improvement0 00.00
Company Loyalty161 6 2 1 3 5 23 9 32 39 41 96.887
Open Source Interest158 51 7 15 12 10 34 11 5 5 7 03.153

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS171 84.68%
Considering new Interface171 10.58%
System Installed on time?171 00.00%

Average Collection size: 443509

TypeCount
Public148
Academic7
School1
Consortium9
Special0

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,0006
[2] 10,001-100,00065
[3] 100,001-250,00038
[4] 250,001-1,000,00035
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,00017
[6] over 10,000,0010



2021 Survey Results
Product: Polaris Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction176 1 3 1 5 16 45 64 41 87.578
ILS Functionality176 2 3 2 18 51 60 40 87.558
Print Functionality173 2 2 2 3 7 33 67 57 87.838
Electronic Functionality171 3 2 8 7 14 16 26 44 28 23 76.267
Company Satisfaction174 2 5 5 9 21 49 50 33 87.187
Support Satisfaction171 1 4 6 8 23 40 47 42 87.318
Support Improvement0 00.00
Company Loyalty175 1 2 6 7 13 15 34 46 51 97.268
Open Source Interest153 47 17 14 10 9 23 12 11 2 3 03.062

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS184 137.07%
Considering new Interface184 00.00%
System Installed on time?184 00.00%

Average Collection size: 594603

TypeCount
Public144
Academic8
School1
Consortium12
Special1

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,0004
[2] 10,001-100,00078
[3] 100,001-250,00044
[4] 250,001-1,000,00033
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,00017
[6] over 10,000,0012



2020 Survey Results
Product: Polaris Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction158 1 1 2 2 5 13 41 64 29 87.468
ILS Functionality157 1 1 1 1 3 7 16 45 50 32 87.348
Print Functionality158 1 1 1 2 10 29 67 47 87.848
Electronic Functionality155 5 2 3 3 8 18 40 37 26 13 66.216
Company Satisfaction154 1 2 1 1 15 26 35 49 24 87.117
Support Satisfaction148 1 2 2 3 15 13 31 40 40 87.318
Support Improvement0 00.00
Company Loyalty154 5 2 1 3 12 16 37 42 36 87.108
Open Source Interest137 46 17 14 9 5 19 10 8 6 3 02.762

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS164 127.32%
Considering new Interface164 00.00%
System Installed on time?164 00.00%

Average Collection size: 630672

TypeCount
Public142
Academic6
School1
Consortium12
Special0

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,0003
[2] 10,001-100,00055
[3] 100,001-250,00035
[4] 250,001-1,000,00038
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,00022
[6] over 10,000,0012



2019 Survey Results
Product: Polaris Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction220 5 5 10 25 51 77 47 87.418
ILS Functionality219 6 4 7 31 58 70 43 87.348
Print Functionality215 1 1 1 1 2 5 17 39 82 66 87.748
Electronic Functionality218 6 2 6 15 18 28 22 54 34 33 76.197
Company Satisfaction216 2 3 4 5 10 28 23 52 51 38 76.757
Support Satisfaction214 1 2 4 10 7 22 28 33 54 53 86.948
Support Improvement212 2 1 8 7 19 72 26 18 28 31 55.945
Company Loyalty210 7 6 6 5 11 24 23 43 47 38 86.457
Open Source Interest208 62 28 24 17 20 30 9 4 4 10 02.702

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS227 198.37%
Considering new Interface227 167.05%
System Installed on time?227 20389.43%

Average Collection size: 491957

TypeCount
Public198
Academic9
School1
Consortium14
Special1

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,00021
[2] 10,001-100,00086
[3] 100,001-250,00042
[4] 250,001-1,000,00044
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,00018
[6] over 10,000,0011



2018 Survey Results
Product: Polaris Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction258 1 2 1 4 3 11 20 77 86 53 87.398
ILS Functionality256 2 1 4 3 11 22 69 99 45 87.408
Print Functionality252 4 1 4 6 12 46 121 58 87.678
Electronic Functionality253 8 4 4 6 12 29 45 59 52 34 76.437
Company Satisfaction252 5 4 3 13 8 28 35 57 61 38 86.597
Support Satisfaction251 1 5 3 7 15 19 28 54 62 57 86.947
Support Improvement247 8 3 9 6 26 79 30 27 30 29 55.705
Company Loyalty247 10 2 7 9 11 34 19 49 57 49 86.527
Open Source Interest248 69 31 36 22 29 32 12 6 4 7 02.642

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS270 228.15%
Considering new Interface270 269.63%
System Installed on time?270 24891.85%

Average Collection size: 427048

TypeCount
Public243
Academic9
School0
Consortium17
Special0

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,00020
[2] 10,001-100,00099
[3] 100,001-250,00050
[4] 250,001-1,000,00058
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,00022
[6] over 10,000,0010



2017 Survey Results
Product: Polaris Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction263 1 4 1 7 14 31 73 87 45 87.258
ILS Functionality261 2 6 4 9 21 85 93 41 87.348
Print Functionality263 1 1 2 2 3 9 14 50 104 77 87.718
Electronic Functionality257 4 2 14 6 15 24 43 57 59 33 86.447
Company Satisfaction259 3 2 4 5 14 34 32 63 63 39 76.717
Support Satisfaction248 2 3 4 8 11 15 30 69 61 45 76.907
Support Improvement244 11 2 6 12 24 69 23 35 29 33 55.755
Company Loyalty255 9 5 3 7 20 23 29 47 54 58 96.607
Open Source Interest256 90 28 38 23 26 22 12 7 4 6 02.322

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS267 207.49%
Considering new Interface267 3011.24%
System Installed on time?267 24792.51%

Average Collection size: 418065

TypeCount
Public228
Academic11
School3
Consortium21
Special2

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,00011
[2] 10,001-100,000119
[3] 100,001-250,00051
[4] 250,001-1,000,00051
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,00030
[6] over 10,000,0010



2016 Survey Results
Product: Polaris Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction216 1 3 3 2 6 29 60 69 43 87.358
ILS Functionality218 2 3 2 4 11 26 61 69 40 87.258
Print Functionality213 1 2 2 6 14 50 76 62 87.728
Electronic Functionality212 9 1 5 8 13 20 34 59 35 28 76.307
Company Satisfaction213 1 8 3 9 22 29 53 51 37 76.847
Support Satisfaction212 1 1 3 2 14 18 37 41 47 48 96.967
Support Improvement205 7 3 8 7 26 62 17 37 18 20 55.565
Company Loyalty213 8 1 5 17 22 22 40 51 47 86.757
Open Source Interest215 92 30 28 15 20 15 6 5 2 2 01.821

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS219 177.76%
Considering new Interface219 2310.50%
System Installed on time?219 20593.61%

Average Collection size: 453385

TypeCount
Public180
Academic17
School4
Consortium15
Special2

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,0009
[2] 10,001-100,00098
[3] 100,001-250,00042
[4] 250,001-1,000,00038
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,00022
[6] over 10,000,0010



2015 Survey Results
Product: Polaris Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction206 3 4 2 9 24 69 61 34 77.247
ILS Functionality207 1 2 4 1 13 22 50 82 32 87.308
Print Functionality207 3 1 1 3 1 10 8 36 94 50 87.578
Electronic Functionality206 3 3 4 15 7 31 35 52 33 23 76.237
Company Satisfaction206 1 2 3 7 7 29 34 43 54 26 86.677
Support Satisfaction204 2 3 5 13 25 27 30 56 43 86.907
Support Improvement195 7 3 11 18 20 58 13 27 18 20 55.335
Company Loyalty198 5 3 5 9 12 18 21 33 50 42 86.637
Open Source Interest204 82 27 27 16 17 15 9 4 1 6 02.041

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS215 177.91%
Considering new Interface215 2612.09%
System Installed on time?215 19791.63%

Average Collection size: 459670

TypeCount
Public184
Academic11
School0
Consortium18
Special0

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,0004
[2] 10,001-100,00097
[3] 100,001-250,00046
[4] 250,001-1,000,00043
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,00025
[6] over 10,000,0010



2014 Survey Results
Product: Polaris Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction169 1 1 1 8 19 43 59 37 87.518
ILS Functionality169 1 1 1 1 1 6 20 46 59 33 87.408
Print Functionality167 3 1 1 1 5 9 33 64 50 87.668
Electronic Functionality164 5 3 7 12 22 34 34 33 14 66.206
Company Satisfaction168 1 1 1 6 9 25 46 44 35 77.237
Support Satisfaction165 1 4 4 6 2 14 41 49 44 87.368
Support Improvement161 4 3 5 7 20 48 16 22 20 16 55.645
Company Loyalty167 6 1 2 9 9 20 29 43 48 97.118
Open Source Interest161 63 22 16 13 16 14 6 8 2 1 02.141

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS170 95.29%
Considering new Interface170 169.41%
System Installed on time?170 16496.47%

Average Collection size: 570334

TypeCount
Public143
Academic10
School0
Consortium14
Special1

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,0006
[2] 10,001-100,00063
[3] 100,001-250,00045
[4] 250,001-1,000,00033
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,00020
[6] over 10,000,0011



2013 Survey Results
Product: Polaris Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction138 1 9 10 34 49 35 87.638
ILS Functionality138 3 6 12 36 51 30 87.548
Print Functionality136 2 2 2 8 7 19 52 44 87.658
Electronic Functionality136 3 3 3 6 8 19 22 22 36 14 86.287
Company Satisfaction136 1 1 11 7 27 46 43 87.708
Support Satisfaction137 3 2 11 9 30 41 41 87.548
Support Improvement135 1 1 4 2 32 15 22 27 31 56.837
Company Loyalty137 2 1 3 3 8 8 23 29 60 97.628
Open Source Interest134 60 18 20 8 5 13 3 5 2 01.781

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS143 10.70%
Considering new Interface143 1510.49%
System Installed on time?143 13292.31%

Average Collection size: 532870

TypeCount
Public118
Academic11
School1
Consortium11
Special1

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,0002
[2] 10,001-100,00057
[3] 100,001-250,00042
[4] 250,001-1,000,00018
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,00016
[6] over 10,000,0011



2012 Survey Results
Product: Polaris Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction152 2 4 8 29 64 45 87.878
ILS Functionality152 1 1 4 8 54 51 33 77.628
Print Functionality0 00.00
Electronic Functionality0 00.00
Company Satisfaction151 2 2 1 6 9 17 60 54 87.838
Support Satisfaction152 1 3 2 5 11 44 44 42 77.528
Support Improvement144 2 3 8 50 19 17 16 29 56.376
Company Loyalty152 1 1 2 14 3 21 24 86 97.979
Open Source Interest149 50 19 23 22 12 10 8 3 1 1 02.112

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS161 21.24%
Considering new Interface161 63.73%
System Installed on time?161 15093.17%

Average Collection size: 411671

TypeCount
Public140
Academic8
School1
Consortium9
Special2

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,0002
[2] 10,001-100,00054
[3] 100,001-250,00043
[4] 250,001-1,000,00027
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,00027
[6] over 10,000,0010



2011 Survey Results
Product: Polaris Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction102 4 1 3 3 19 37 35 87.778
ILS Functionality102 1 4 8 20 46 23 87.718
Print Functionality0 00.00
Electronic Functionality0 00.00
Company Satisfaction100 1 2 3 2 4 15 36 37 97.808
Support Satisfaction100 2 2 4 2 6 22 29 33 97.558
Support Improvement97 3 1 2 2 6 23 10 12 18 20 56.377
Company Loyalty100 1 2 2 2 2 2 9 28 52 97.959
Open Source Interest99 46 12 20 8 2 6 3 1 1 01.481

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS106 21.89%
Considering new Interface106 87.55%
System Installed on time?106 10195.28%

Average Collection size: 541249

TypeCount
Public91
Academic3
School1
Consortium9
Special1

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,0004
[2] 10,001-100,00039
[3] 100,001-250,00022
[4] 250,001-1,000,00020
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,00015
[6] over 10,000,0011



2010 Survey Results
Product: Polaris Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction101 1 3 2 1 3 17 42 32 87.778
ILS Functionality0 00.00
Print Functionality0 00.00
Electronic Functionality0 00.00
Company Satisfaction100 2 2 6 3 14 32 41 97.838
Support Satisfaction101 1 4 1 4 3 18 30 40 97.748
Support Improvement100 1 1 2 3 17 11 6 33 26 87.118
Company Loyalty100 1 1 1 2 4 6 8 25 52 97.929
Open Source Interest100 41 13 17 6 6 5 5 4 1 2 01.981

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS104 65.77%
Considering new Interface104 109.62%
System Installed on time?104 9995.19%

Average Collection size: 356804

TypeCount
Public92
Academic6
School0
Consortium6
Special0

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,0002
[2] 10,001-100,00033
[3] 100,001-250,00020
[4] 250,001-1,000,00017
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,0009
[6] over 10,000,0010



2009 Survey Results
Product: Polaris Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction92 1 1 2 1 1 13 52 21 87.798
ILS Functionality0 00.00
Print Functionality0 00.00
Electronic Functionality0 00.00
Company Satisfaction92 1 1 1 4 4 6 48 27 87.808
Support Satisfaction91 2 1 2 1 1 17 45 22 87.688
Support Improvement87 3 1 1 3 13 12 8 29 17 86.838
Company Loyalty91 3 1 1 1 5 2 5 37 36 87.688
Open Source Interest90 27 21 13 2 6 10 4 3 3 1 02.281

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS92 66.52%
Considering new Interface92 66.52%
System Installed on time?92 8592.39%





2008 Survey Results
Product: Polaris Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction51 2 3 4 5 21 16 87.738
ILS Functionality0 00.00
Print Functionality0 00.00
Electronic Functionality0 00.00
Company Satisfaction51 4 3 2 5 15 22 97.768
Support Satisfaction51 1 4 4 3 8 11 20 97.418
Support Improvement0 not applicable
Company Loyalty52 3 1 1 2 1 2 3 14 25 97.338
Open Source Interest51 15 13 6 3 2 7 1 1 3 02.291

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS53 59.43%
Considering new Interface53 35.66%
System Installed on time?53 4890.57%





2007 Survey Results
Product: Polaris Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction59 1 1 1 5 12 18 21 97.788
ILS Functionality0 00.00
Print Functionality0 00.00
Electronic Functionality0 00.00
Company Satisfaction64 1 1 3 2 11 20 26 97.898
Support Satisfaction64 1 3 2 8 17 33 98.119
Support Improvement0 not applicable
Company Loyalty63 2 2 2 3 5 7 18 24 97.498
Open Source Interest62 20 11 11 3 5 4 2 3 1 2 02.272

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS64 11.56%
Considering new Interface64 23.13%
System Installed on time?64 11.56%




2024 : gen: 7.53 company 7.01 loyalty 7.10 support 7.00

2023 : gen: 7.36 company 6.81 loyalty 6.90 support 6.89

2022 : gen: 7.40 company 7.07 loyalty 6.88 support 7.06

2021 : gen: 7.57 company 7.18 loyalty 7.26 support 7.31

2020 : gen: 7.46 company 7.11 loyalty 7.10 support 7.31

2019 : gen: 7.41 company 6.75 loyalty 6.45 support 6.94

2018 : gen: 7.39 company 6.59 loyalty 6.52 support 6.94

2017 : gen: 7.25 company 6.71 loyalty 6.60 support 6.90

2016 : gen: 7.35 company 6.84 loyalty 6.75 support 6.96

2015 : gen: 7.24 company 6.67 loyalty 6.63 support 6.90

2014 : gen: 7.51 company 7.23 loyalty 7.11 support 7.36

2013 : gen: 7.63 company 7.70 loyalty 7.62 support 7.54

2012 : gen: 7.87 company 7.83 loyalty 7.97 support 7.52

2011 : gen: 7.77 company 7.80 loyalty 7.95 support 7.55

2010 : gen: 7.77 company 7.83 loyalty 7.92 support 7.74

2009 : gen: 7.79 company 7.80 loyalty 7.68 support 7.68

2008 : gen: 7.73 company 7.76 loyalty 7.33 support 7.41

2007 : gen: 7.78 company 7.89 loyalty 7.49 support 8.11

Comments (survey2023)

I will do my best to update collection size at individual branches rather than the whole system. (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)

520,546 represents the entire [...]. 372,283 if you are just referring to the Main Branch. (Library type: Public; collection size: large; ils satisfaction: 9)

Our new online catalog overlay (Aspen Discovery) is built on open source.technology. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 9)

We went live with Vega Discover on May 1, 2023. And promptly told staff to stop using it on May 18th. Innovative sold us a product in 2022, that didn't even have the functions they said it had then (2022) by spring 2023. We have been working with them for months on the various issues and while some have been fixed, some have not and are apparently not an easy fix. We are very unhappy with Innovative right now. Our main issues are that our eContent is not showing correctly as they are having issues with the Indiana Digital Library and other OverDrive Advantage accounts. Their roll-up feature is also not working the way we expected. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 7)

We don't have enough money to consider an open source as we can't afford to bring on developers to staff. With so few products on the market, we are prepared to just accept what is available and choose an ILS that we can afford and will make do.- (Library type: Public; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 5)

Product is overall fine. Customer service and response/resolution turnaround continues to falter. We have tickets years old that are still unresolved. (Library type: Public; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 8)

Library staffing levels and equipment are not conducive to an open source ILS solution (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 7)

I am very new to managing the library. My answers reflect my current inexperience. (Library type: Public; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 8)

We switched to Polaris Leap in March 2022. (Library type: Public; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 9)

Overall, I feel that integrated library systems have a monopoly since it is a very small market. There are many different configurations for public libraries and an ILS should be able to work with each configuration. If there is an open source software that can do that, I would be interested. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 6)

We continue to struggle with how products function for our library consortium. We need more autonomy built in for the individual systems to control some of the features of the Vega Discovery Layer for example. Innovative is also shifting away from working with other vendors because they want all services to function through them such as promote, events, etc. The focus they are putting on those additional products means they aren't giving enough attention to the nuts and bolts of how their systems could work better for libraries and consortia. (Library type: Consortium; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 6)

Last year's comments are still valid. Some improvements and developments have been made in LEAP for Acquisitions and Cataloging, but there is a long road ahead to make the web-based product as functional as the client. We continue to struggle with resource-heavy reports crashing overnight. Those crashes disable the autofill feature and slows down processing. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 7)

We work mostly through our consortium so we don't have much direct exposure to our ILS vendor. In the above we considered "electronic resources" to encompass OverDrive content. Physical items represent approximately 1.7M and additionally we have approximately 600K digital items. (Library type: Consortium; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 8)

We currently share our ILS with the local public and community college library. The public library is the system owner/administrator. Even though there are better and more effective systems out there (and ones that would be better suited to an academic rather than public library), we do not have the budget to consider that, or to consider an open-source system that would require a funded staff position to administer. (Library type: Academic; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 5)

Polaris ILS is great. Vega Discovery has lots of problems. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 3)

This product has a terrible library search catalogue - much easier to use patron catalogue. The catalogue is in no way intuitive and often you cannot find a book under title, but if you try again, it is under author. Very irritating. (Library type: Public; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 4)

Not sure what an open source is, so I didn't want to comment (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)

Our Polaris ILS works well for the majority of our needs, but we cannot justify the annual price increases anymore. (Library type: Consortium; collection size: large; ils satisfaction: 5)

Regarding the question, "Would the library consider working with this company again if it were to migrate to a new system in the future?" our answer "very likely" is because we simply wouldn't exclude Clarivate/Innovative from consideration without a significant product/service or corporate failing. Our answer should not be understood to mean that we would *prefer* to work with Clarivate/Innovative over any other vendor, though. We'd be open to it. (Library type: Public; collection size: large; ils satisfaction: 8)

We are the administrator of the ILS for a consortium. Many features of the ILS and of new products are not built with consortia in mind, and it takes a long time for the products to be ready for us. When they do roll them out, they often need a lot of work to make them functional for consortia. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 7)

We are a school library who uses Polaris because that is what our public library uses and we are linked with our public library. It really is not made for school use and I wish they would add a few more features that could make it better for us to use. (Library type: School; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 6)

ILS