Perceptions 2024: An International Survey of Library Automation

Narrative Comments

This page lists the narrative of comments given by individuals responding to the 2024 library automation perceptions survey. Comments have been redacted to remove content that identifies the indivudual or institution. To place the comments in perspective, the library type, size of collection, and the rating given for overall ILS satisfaction is provided.

There were 515 narrative comments given regarding 48 different products:

top

We do not use an ILS as we have no circulating volumes and no physical acquisitions. (Library type: Academic; collection size: very small)

---

Accessit Library

top

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

---

ALEPH 500

top

We are already in the migration phase to Folio (Library type: ; collection size: large; ils satisfaction: 5)

We are currently implementing FOLIO. We aim at going live Q1 2026. (Library type: National; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 2)

The ILS no longer meets our needs, and the vendor has not enhanced it significantly in many years. We are launching a migration this spring. (Library type: Academic; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 3)

Actualmente la Dirección General de Bibliotecas y Servicios Digitales de Información de la [...] , tiene 148 bibliotecas a cargo, de las cuales 115 ya operan en el SIGB Koha v21 y solamente quedan 33 en ALEPH 500 v23. El equipo de Tecnologías de la Información del Sistema Bibliotecario de la [...] ha realizado sus propios procesos de migración de ALEPH500 a Koha v21. (Library type: ; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 8)

In Poland, Ex libris is represented by the Polish company Aleph Polska, and it serves as a customer support. (Library type: Academic; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 5)

---

Alexandria

top

The main issue with Alexandria's functionality is that the site regularly crashes and prevents staff from cataloging or circulating materials for several minutes at a time. Beyond this issue, company support is sparse and unresponsive. When we attempted to purchase a new product through a sales executive, but were forced to abandon the plan after several months of no response. Similarly, when we attempted to amend our renewal contract, we had to repeatedly reach out to support before receiving assistance. (Library type: Academic; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 4)

---

Alma

top

[...] (Library type: ; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 7)

Our library will go with what the consortium chooses; I don't know if open source ILSes will be considered. We are only just starting the process. (Library type: Law; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 5)

This is not a clarification on the answers above - more that we filled in one version of the survey, but it looks like the option to do the final submission timed out so we hope you don't have a duplication of our content. (Library type: Academic; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 7)

We are just migrating to Alma, with our cutover date in June. So my opinions are based on the little bit I know/understand about Alma and our experiences that we've had with Ex Libris in the last 18 months. (Library type: ; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 3)

As a consortia office we use the Alma Community Zone for help with adding/updating some e-resource records. Some records are ExLibris managed, some are community managed and we've run into problems primarily with the community supported ones. The Alma Network Zone for management of both print and e-resources has been working well. Support has been improving over the past year or so. We had some issues in the past with incomplete documentation about new features to be added and implemented without our knowledge which has caused either functionality to break or major uproar among our member institutions. ExLibris/Clarivate is doing quite a bit lately to better manage support cases that are long outstanding. This is the reason for my mostly, all # 8 choices. The system is working well, we don't have any major complaints, but have minor issues in just about every area which prevents a perfect 9. Most of the E-Res issues are linking errors related to problematic metadata coming from vendors, so I really can't ding the ILS vendor on that. (Library type: Consortium; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 8)

We're a bit wary of Ex Libris raising prices with way too many products on offer. Also wary of it's use of AI, and R&D costs being passed to library via increased subscription prices. (Library type: Academic; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 7)

We appreciate that Ex Libris have agreements with the user groups (Library type: Academic; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 7)

Consortium preparing RFP (Library type: Academic; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 7)

Most of our concerns about Alma/Primo are around pricing rather than functionality. We are still in the process of implementing FOLIO and OpenRS, with a planned go-live of July 2025. (Library type: ; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 6)

The state paid for the current ILS, and the college is unable to budget for ILS, so I am going with it anyway. (Library type: Academic; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 6)

Alma Primo is a robust ILS, but there are a few weaknesses oberved: inconsistent button placement and functionaliy for common tasks - sometimes the button (such as Save, or Done, for example) is on the bottom of the page, sometimes at the top, sometimes required and sometimes not - in general, many actions require too many steps - error messages are often not helpful in determining how to correct the situation The online support documentation is also thorough, but here again, there are often so many embedded links to other pages, and key points buried in the text, that is requires a great deal of reading and discernment to determine the best approach. In general it often appears the software coding was writting by a team of people working independently that did not communicate consistently to create a more efficient and predictable interface. There are many great features in the software and documentation, and the overall product is strong, but it is overly complex for basic and routine tasks. (Library type: Academic; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 7)

We are happy with our current system it is cloud-based, integrated, enables efficient and effective workflows for both print and digital content. (Library type: Academic; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 8)

Alma is somehow both overly complicated and completely deficient in surprising areas. (Library type: Academic; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 6)

Recent Clarivate announcements have soured a little the feeling of working with them in future. However their tech and support has allowed the library to continue to operate effectively in a time of reduced budgets and headcount. (Library type: Academic; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 7)

We are currently with Sierra but are migrating to Alma in July 2025 as part of the NC Consortium. (Library type: Academic; collection size: large)

ALMA/PRIMO is shiny and new, but we can tell that none of the devs are library-people. (Library type: Academic; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 8)

The Alma cloud platform has established the Taiwan group of Ex Libris alma Users in Taiwan. This Users group holds a user conference every year for users to express their opinions and communicate. (Library type: Academic; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 7)

Current ILS was chosen by the consortium, not the library. (Library type: Academic; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 1)

No IT specific support staff in library structure which hinder our choice of open source. (Library type: Academic; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 8)

Alma is a very good program. It is a pity that many parts of it cannot be utilized due to the limitations of the Korean market environment. (Library type: Academic; collection size: very large)

Given our shop size open source adoption would have to be predicated on an extremely strong support base that we saw strong evidence of scaling into the future adnwell as a strong product (Library type: Academic; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 7)

We do not choose our ILS locally. It is decided at the state-level. (Library type: Academic; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 8)

We have not yet completed Phase 2 of implementing Alma/Primo VE. We are understaffed at our central tech systems office (and lacking a systems librarian), so we are slowly exploring beyond-essential system features and are proceeding cautiously. (Library type: Academic; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 7)

We will never choose an ILS/LSP because it either is or isn't open source. For us, it will always be a matter of functionality, ease of use, and support. (Library type: Academic; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 8)

We are currently in the process of migrating from Sierra to Alma. I waited a while to take this survey so I could get a better grasp on how useful Alma is for us. After going through several training sessions I like what we have. I based my answers to this survey on what I have learned about Alma so far. So far I am happy! (Library type: Academic; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 7)

We have very little print in our collection, save for original dissertations. (Library type: Medical; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 7)

We are overall satisfied with Alma and the coverage it has for day-to-day library management. Our only negative is that the system is so large and covers so much that it feels overwhelming to some staff. Alma could benefit greatly from a more modular design where libraries can choose the modules they need and omit those that only cause noise. We do not use Alma-D for example, but the entire configuration kit is available in the menus and we have to be mindful of any configurations or labels related to this product when configuring so we don't accidentally activate something we don't use. (Library type: Academic; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 8)

Overall we are pleased with our ILS, but there are some areas which lack some beneficial and (at times) obvious functionality. Regular updates and improvements to the platform are appreciated, but with so many changes in development, it can take some time for changes that we feel are relevant to our library. (Library type: Academic; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 7)

We recently signed a 3 year agreement with ExLibris with an option to extend to 5 years. After those 5 years are up, I would like our institution to seriously consider an open source system instead. It is limiting to have to be an ExLibris shop. (Library type: Academic; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 7)

The vendor provides assistance, but we still find the system complex and it requires time to learn. (Library type: Academic; collection size: large; ils satisfaction: 8)

Alma provides a great platform for electronic resource and metadata management. Fulfillment seems to be an afterthought and somewhat difficult to manage. The resource sharing functions are not very good at all. From an access services standpoint, Alma is bit too much like a Rube Goldberg machine (Why should we have to know HTML, XSL, and XML to create overdue notices???). I will say that after staff finally figure out how to make it work, Alma performance is excellent. But my goodness, shouldn't check in/check out, patron notifications, and interlibrary loan be easier? I think so. (Library type: Academic; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 8)

Customer service response has gotten a bit slower over the past year. (Library type: Academic; collection size: large; ils satisfaction: 6)

La información del tamaño de la colección es de la [...], que corresponde a 22 bibliotecas y a 5 Centros de Documentación Regionales, con servicios bibliotecarios en total en 29 ciudades del país, en razón a que la colección circula a nivel nacional y la prestación de los servicios bibliotecarios son a nivel nacional, con variaciones regionales. (Library type: Public; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 8)

The [...] is the medical library for [...] . Most of our electronic resources are jointly licensed with [...] main campus. [...] currently uses FOLIO with EBSCO EDS and a Blacklight interface. Sharing a system with our main campus would remove several barriers such as user access/authentication, discovery, resource management and cost. Discussions of whether to consider a migration will begin in June, 2025. We have no sense at this time if we will pursue this beyond this initial discussion. We should also note that our perception of Ex Libris is that technically they give strong and outstanding product support, but administratively they are very, very difficult to work with. It took us two years to get the right people involved to change to electronic payment. This is terrible customer service. (Library type: ; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 8)

8 because there is always room for improvement 1 because nothing is impossible (Library type: Academic; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 8)

One of the concerns of the Library is the extent to which Clarivate is moving into the generative AI territory throughout its product range. There is very little detail around what models are used, what data is being used to train those models and what steps are being taken to ensure personal information or intellectual property (full-text theses, etc) are being protected. The Library will take this into consideration in the coming years as it evaluates all its systems in a process of continuous improvement. (Library type: Academic; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 7)

We are currently migrating from sierra ILS to Alma. (Library type: Academic; collection size: large; ils satisfaction: 7)

Exlibris can do better on the service. Poor feedback (Library type: Academic; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 8)

The [...] migrated from Voyager to Alma-Primo VE in 2024 and went live with the new system in June 2024.Overall, staff are very satisfied with the new system and find it much easier to work in compared to Voyager. I handle all ILS support issues and find that vendor support for Voyager was better than the current vendor support for Alma-Primo. (Library type: Government Agency; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 9)

While ExLibris has been an excellent vendor for onboarding, Clarivate's motivations and actions are concerning especially with the consolidation ILS/LSP vendors. There is enthusiasm for open source adoption. However, our institution lacks the resources, infrastructure, and expertise to credibly support any non-hosted open source tool, and without a radical reprioritization by university and library administration, no ability to adequately support even a hosted solution. (Library type: Academic; collection size: large; ils satisfaction: 8)

We are currently migrating, so I cannot speak to our satisfaction. (Library type: Academic; collection size: very large)

I have a comment to the question "How satisfied is this library with this company's customer support services?" We only implemented Alma in November 2024, we haven't had a chance to use support services yet. (Library type: Academic; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 6)

Overall, it’s an excellent tool. Most of the complaints I hear about Alma are its slowness and its complexity. Its complexity makes troubleshooting difficult. There are some questionable design decisions, especially the fiddly and overwhelming menus, but it is definitely not lacking in functionality. Holdings records make managing titles much easier. We have some frustrations with the resource sharing integration and cross linking records. There is not much support for tracking how the system has changed over time, which makes auditing difficult. There is also a robust user community that Ex Libris interacts with on the listserv and during conferences. The different levels of corporate (Clarivate/ProQuest/Ex Libris) can be difficult to track. Clarivate, in particular, has implemented some negative changes, like changing to a subscription model for eBooks and digital collections and ending support for purchasing ProQuest eBooks and print titles in Rialto (Library type: Academic; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 8)

We are a small university library of one of the youngest Croatian universities. We have just entered the process of linking the library system through the national e-University project. We believe that the answers to your next survey will be much more optimistic. (Library type: Academic; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 1)

In many ways the Ex Libris platform is too complex for the needs of our university library system, and we don't have the technical staff to really use it as well as we could. (Library type: Academic; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 5)

Our responses for the year are based on the implementation process as much as for the product itself, as the process took more than half of the year. We found that much of the documentation was not truly descriptive of the implications of the decisions we would make for them. Migrating from one set of Ex Libris products to another should have been more straightforward, with customary practices well outlined, now that the vendor has migrated hundreds of other customers. We consistently got praise for our work, as if the bar were too low, and they fully expected us to not be productive in the first several weeks after going live. Analytics training was especially sparse, requiring us to rely on Oracle's documentation, rather than Ex Libris' own. (Library type: Academic; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 5)

We are a member of a consortium so only would migrate if the consortium decided to do so. (Library type: Academic; collection size: large; ils satisfaction: 7)

[...]represents almost 70 libraries on two different ILS - Alma/Primo VE (15 Academic Libraries) and Polaris ILS (55 School, Public, and Special libraries; including our State Library). The comments and scores above are related to Alma (our Academic Libraries) specifically and based on an internal survey we do annually. (Library type: Consortium; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 7)

Very disappointed in this LMS after only 2 years of implementation. Relying on community records, which are very poor and enhancement requests voting to improve a Library system which has a very high subscription price is very frustrating. the support desk service is intermittent depending on the support required. Testing of new release features is poor and creates more stress and bug fixes. (Library type: Academic; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 3)

We're a consortium office with a wide range of library types and sizes. Ex Libris is fine, but overly complex for most of our needs. They are finally developing a more robust consortium management process. (Library type: Consortium; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 6)

Regarding customer service, we appreciate the effort to develop a new training team and to offer regular training webinars. Our experience with support tickets in the past year has been very mixed. Often, we end up repeating the same information for each new support tier. This may reflect a recent influx of new support trainees. (Library type: Law; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 6)

[...] (Library type: Academic; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 4)

Given that we have not used Alma in production, it does not seem appropriate for us to comment on our experiences or satisfaction with the system. We are still using Sierra until June 23, 2025. (Library type: Academic; collection size: very large)

Sofern ein Umstieg des Verbundes auf Folio erfolgt, würden wir sehr wahrscheinlich früher oder später ebenfalls wechseln. Das hauptsächliche Argument dafür wären aktuell die hohen Kosten, die ExLibris für seine Produkte verlangt. (Library type: Academic; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 8)

Response time on issues can be a real problem. In addition, Ex Libris often doesn't take into consideration the needs of libraries that are different than the ones that it sees as its primary customers, or that libraries operate in a variety of ways that result in a need for flexibility in the way systems operate. (Library type: Academic; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 6)

Alma is a wonderful ILS, but getting it set up to meet our needs is taking longer than we anticipated. We know there is SO much more we could be doing with the system--it has much more capabilities than we're taking advantage of! It also takes a lot of time to master. We did not realize that going on, and I wish that had been communicated better. When they show you the demo, they don't tell you how much work it will take to get to that point. (Library type: Academic; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 7)

While Alma is probably the best option out there for us, it's also one of the only (if not only) viable options, so we certainly have our complaints and feel its limitations. There are many things it doesn't do 100% well, and we just make things work as well as we can. Support is responsive (in a timely manner) if not always on point. Sometimes we have what feels like very niche needs for our unique library, and they cannot be fully addressed by Alma. (Library type: Academic; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 6)

Support services for this vendor can be mixed. For the most part, they are very helpful, but there are some cases where tickets have not been resolved for over a year or were closed quickly after determining that the issue described will not be resolved. As a federal/military library, we are only permitted to use library systems that meet stringent federal security standards. This requirement means that we cannot use open source solutions for major software. (Library type: Academic; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 8)

We are not necessarily against an open source ILS but it being open source is not a major factor in our consideration. It depends on the functionally, overall cost of ownership, cybersecurity, etc. Also, we would likely not "self-support" as our mission is to be a library, not to be an IT department or software developers. We are not big enough to have people dedicated to this and even if we could dedicate a person to do this, what would we do if that person leaves? It's not reasonably sustainable. Now if it is a hosted or supported OSS, what is really the benefit vs. any other hosted system? That likely depends on the system and the implementation but in and of itself does not make OSS better for fulfilling our libraries mission. (Library type: Academic; collection size: large; ils satisfaction: 9)

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

It is important to our organization that all feature releases are thoroughly tested and we feel that this has not always been completed with appropriate rigor before release. Sometimes delaying our implementation. (Library type: State; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 8)

While a very robust system, Alma remains a system that best works for large libraries and does not serve the needs of small libraries where only one person (or fewer) works in each area. There is a steep learning curve for configuration, and many functions are so complex that it becomes difficult to use when we do not need the multiplicity of options that are offered. (Library type: Academic; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 7)

What real choices are there? (Library type: Academic; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 6)

Want to consider open source systems but don't have local system developers in the library. (Library type: Academic; collection size: large; ils satisfaction: 8)

We have very limited contact with the system vendor after go-live. We are a member of a national consortium and a central consortium office handles support issues. When we migrate to another system the most likely scenario is that we will continue to work with the consortium office (9 out of 0-9). We would certainly consider working with the current vendor, but it entirely depends on what they have to offer in the future (5 out of 0-9) (Library type: National; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 6)

Our consortium is currently in a bidding process for a new library systems contract. (Library type: Academic; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 8)

Exlibris needs improvement in: Fulfillment Rda bibframe recommended bibliography (Leganto) management of printed periodicals Incident resolution (response times, quality of responses, timetable, language). In general, needs to adapt better to non-Saxon library philosophies. (Library type: Academic; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 7)

I rated the company's customer service a 5 because the quality can be inconsistent—sometimes it's excellent, while other times it falls short. On several occasions, when our consortia has requested updates or fixes, we've been told they won't be addressed at this time. (Library type: Academic; collection size: large; ils satisfaction: 5)

ExLibris' support is terrible. Generally when things go to Tier 2, it takes months to get a reply. (Library type: Academic; collection size: large; ils satisfaction: 5)

Approx. Number of items incudes print and electronic books and journals (Library type: Academic; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 7)

Figure above relates to physical items only (Library type: Academic; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 7)

I did not place answers in the questions because we are currently migrating to Alma and it is listed as our current system which it is not so any answers that I give would not be helpful for this survey (Library type: Academic; collection size: very large)

Very pleased with the collaborative approach this company has with user groups and community. I think it is amazing how responsive product managers and the team are with user group email list discussions. The co-design of products via customer suggestions (idea exchange) and agreements with the user groups on voted enhancement requests, early adopter programs with feedback actively sought) means that libraries have quite a few paths for influencing product development. (Library type: Academic; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 8)

ExLibris Alma is such a strong industry leader, we do not see a lot of choice. We are also a regional consortium catlaog. ExLibris Alma is the only product that has the consortium features we need. (Library type: Academic; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 7)

[...] (Library type: Academic; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 4)

There aren't many products on the market, so there isn't real competition against Alma/Primo. Wish there was real competition. We LOVED Voyager - it was SO MUCH more logical to use. MUCH better back end. (Library type: Academic; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 5)

We do not have full say in our ILS because we are consortium members. We have spent a large amount of time learning and gaining confidence with our current system. We would prefer not to migrate, as the 'sunk cost' associated with this gain in confidence is foundational. It would therefore have to be repeated in a new system, whereas in our current system, we can build upon that foundatiion and continue our forward momentum. We welcome change when it means doing more, and more interesting things. Learning new ways to do exactly the things we do now feels more and more like a waste in the fullness of time. (Library type: Academic; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 7)

Overall suits our needs as a library system. There are some tweaks that would make life easier in the overall design, or responsiveness of the support, but no issues that are currently causing us to consider migration. (Library type: Academic; collection size: large; ils satisfaction: 8)

En France, nous ne pouvons choisir un prestataire sans passer par un appel d'offre et une mise en concurrence. Nous ne pouvons savoir à l'avance qui répondra à cet appel d'offre ni qui sera sélectionné puisque tout passe par des grilles dévaluation. Passer sur une solution libre est impensable, les services informatiques de notre institution ne le souhaite pas, n'ayant pas d'informaticiens dédiés à notre direction de la documentation (Library type: Academic; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 7)

One feature I would find incredibly useful in Alma is the ability to easily embed analytics reports into webpages or platforms like LibGuides so that we could create publicly accessible report dashboards. Having an embed link option for reports would streamline the process of sharing data and insights with broader audiences, including students, faculty, and staff. Without this our reports are only available to staff who have the Analytics role and can access analytics. It is a shame that this functionality is not built into ALMA like FOLIO which has integrated Panoramo into their product to make creating and sharing visualizations possible in a more user-friendly way. Currently, the lack of an embed option limits our ability to share analytics with our campus community. (Library type: Academic; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 7)

Open Source would be feasible only if we had a large pool of in-house programmers. (Library type: Academic; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 7)

---

Apollo

top

The Biblionix team has been great to us and Apollo is an excellent value. (Library type: ; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 8)

We absolutely love the Biblionix Apollo ILS. The team is always very helpful whenever we need assistance in any area. (Library type: ; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 9)

Not sure what Open Source means. As a new director, I am learning the current system and it seems to work as it should. Currently, no need to change. (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)

It would be great if they ILS system provided a email newsletter. It would also be helpful for me if there was a report that I can see which staff did the check out or check in. It's hard to follow performance when I can't pinpoint which employee is struggling. (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 5)

We left Biblionix and switched to Insignia which was presented to us as "More Robust" for "Less Money" ....it was a complete disaster. Within 4 months we switched back to Apollo by Biblionix and I do not see us leaving as long as I am the director here. (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)

We have had poor results with open source products. (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 5)

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

We briefly discussed Koha before we went with Biblionix Apollo but had concerns about troubleshooting and support if we had had problems. Our IT support for the city has never been completely reliable either. (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 8)

We just switched to Apollo from Destiny so we are new to using it and I am not quite used to how everthing works ...I haven't even tried to bring up a report yet! (Library type: Public; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 8)

Apollo from Biblionix remains the perfect match for this library. Customer support is excellent. We currently do not have any purchased eresources in the catalog, so did not answer that question. (Library type: ; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 9)

Very happy with Apollo. (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)

Happy with Apollo but considered KOHA because some other local libraries also have it, and would allow for some catalog sharing. (But, we are also neighbors with several Apollo libraries) (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 8)

As a non-certified library director (no formal training), I find the reports awkward and the customer service non-existent. We struggle to find how to get the data we need from the reporting system. The reference manual is unwieldy and difficult to search, and the user forums are like going down a rabbit hole when I need a quick answer... (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 2)

The customer service provided by Biblionix is unparalleled in the industry. Small problems are corrected in a few hours, medium-sized problems in a few days, and large problems in a few weeks. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 9)

If Atriuum had the ability to chat/text with our patrons, we'd have switched already, but Apollo's "Gabbie" is a feature our patrons love and we're not willing to drop it until a suitable alternative is available. (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 5)

We just changed ILS last year to Apollo. We are very happy and would not be considering changing systems for a while. (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)

Current provider is terrible with getting back to us on problems. I've presented them with a couple of problems that we have had and they have never gotten back to us. I feel like we are a small fish in a big pond and that they feel we are not worth their efforts. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 5)

---

Atriuum

top

We do not have electronic resources to manage since we are such a small library. (Library type: Public; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 7)

easy to use and find where I want to be for someone who is not from a library background (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 6)

Atriuum works well for the [...] school system with an OPAC, easy cataloging, check-out, and check-in, inventory, but needs to be renewed and paid for annually, and isn't always user-friendly when reclassifying student information, classes, and other information that is not routinely updated/changed. Open Source is an interesting alternative. (Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 8)

We are currently using the discovery interface (OPAC) provided by Atriuum through Book Systems. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 9)

Atriuum is low budget, no frills. It's not an attractive interface but it takes care of basic needs for a small college library. Students use databases for almost all their research, and our print circulation is a fraction of what it was ten years ago. It is mostly the leisure collection at this point. (Library type: Academic; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 4)

We are a small rural library and we like the system that we have. Works great for us! (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 8)

Atriuum customer service has been unable to assist us in addressing issues. Customer service rep completely deleted a bibliographic record and truly did not know what she was doing. We've had better luck resorting to Atriuum's (outdated) technical manual and troubleshooting issues for ourselves. (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 6)

We are a very small library system. We believe our patrons would benefit from the library participating in SCLends which uses SirsiDynix as the ILS for all of the participating counties. Our wish to change ILS has more to do with that rather than dissatisfaction with Atriuum. (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 5)

The overdue letter process was more difficult than expected. I'm also a bit disappointed Atriuum support cannot tell me how many overdue notices were sent by e-mail. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 5)

We recently migrated to Atriuum from VERSO. We are very happy with Atriuum thus far. (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)

---

Axiell Aurora

top

There has been some major changes with ILS and this has had some big problems with it. It feels like ILS is under construction still while we are already trying to use it. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 3)

---

Bibliovation

top

I would consider the discovery layer from Bywater. With Bibliovation, the development is slow and we constantly get our needs put aside when something more interesting to the programmers comes up. We've been waiting years for some development and the simplest things don't seem to work. Items can have two statuses, if you have a bib record that doesn't allow holds and a staff person overrides that and places a hold then anyone can places holds on that bib. There are so many bugs, our system had to create a database. The most frustrating thing lately is that APIs don't work well and a SIP2 connection costs $2000 per connection and usually takes additional programming to get it to work. So using 3rd part solutions is problematic if you can get them to work at all. Also new features are non-existent unless the US government wants them. Quite often, they are things that public libraries can't use. They don't normalize data so searching when there's punctuation or symbols in the field is difficult at best. (Library type: ; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 0)

After migrating from SirsiDynix to Bibliovation, our library has encounter many incompatibilities with other products such as our print management system that we have been using for years with no issues. We find Bibliovation to be a primitive system and lacks organization in its layout and too many down time. (Library type: Military; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 3)

---

Carl.X

top

We would love to go to an Open Source ILS, but do not currently have the resources to employ the staff needed for that type of a transition. (Library type: ; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 5)

Re: electronic resources: [...] works with a philosophy of keeping our electronic resources out of the ILS; instead we rely on our discovery layer (Aspen Discovery) to connect our patrons to our various online collections (OverDrive, Hoopla, Odilo, Kanopy, ComicsPlus, and others) (Library type: Consortium; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 7)

We are actively planning to switch out of the shared consortial ILS into a stand alone ILS by the end of July 2025. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 3)

The [...] team who manages CARL.X for [...] does a superb job of responding to development needs and requests. We appreciate their hard work in customizing CARL.X to improve its functionality for our school librarians. (Library type: School; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 7)

[...] (Library type: Public; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 7)

Collection number include electronic books. 92K physical collection + over 100K OverDrive/Libby eCollection (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 7)

CARL X as a product is functional but often not intuitive to those who haven't been using it for a long time. Minor idiosyncrasies of the software can be overlooked by even daily users. Unclear information being presented by the ILS can lead to staff oversights that hinder customer service. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 5)

---

Destiny

top

We love the functionality of Destiny, but the cost keeps climbing and our library budget has not increased in many years. At this point, we heavily supplement our budget with fundraisers and grants to buy books. If there was a product with similar functionality and a more reasonable cost, we would definitely consider it. (Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 7)

Our system is accurate and dependable. Follett regularly updates its software and procedures for us. We do nothing. (Library type: Academic; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)

Follett Destiny has moved to a new platform that is creating problems. All of the libraries in the district keep losing titles from their databases or titles have been merged with a different title creating major problems when looking for books or trying to check books out. The textbook section of the program has merged with a resource section creating more of a warehouse inventory program. Within Resource, you have subcategories. There are so many steps to use the program, you cannot locate or check out textbook/equipment. To do a complete inventory, you are having to do it twice because you no longer know where anything is located. Because no librarians were consulted, the district personnel in charge now have set up textbooks using grade levels instead of titles and they also changed up the barcode symbology so all textbooks and equipment have to be re-barcoded. (Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 3)

Follett Destiny is geared toward an Education environment, not a Public Library environment. CPL currently partners with the local school district with a shared ILS. We pay a portion of the fee each year directly to Follett. We have been unsatisfied with the school district's current computer tech company which either ignores us completely or tries to put off helping us directly when it comes to this ILS. (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 2)

I was shocked when I became director two years ago and the company would not provide a brief overview of their product. They offered that I could pay for training or figure it out on my own (being at a small library, I opted for the latter). The fact that they would not take an hour or less to introduce me to the basics of their software did not impress me. That said, technical support has been excellent any time I have called with a specific question. (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 7)

Destiny has become so expensive and the most desirable features such as TitlePeek are an add-on. They keep sending emails asking why we don't use them for cloud hosting. Honestly, our district cannot afford it! (Library type: School; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 2)

I'm not sure how to answer these, but I'd like to contribute. I'm the tech director. The librarians don't mind Destiny, and they have no plans or desires to change. The tech department hates it. We use it for our laptop fleet management and it's awful. It's outdated and clunky and impossible to query. The only thing I like about it is that it works with barcode readers. I've looked and there doesn't seem to be anything else out there, and I can't imagine that Follett will update anything anytime soon. (Library type: School; collection size: very small)

The entire El Molino High School has been consolidated with Analy High School, so I consolidated the collections at Analy High Library. There are still about 4000 books in that space in anticipation of reopening the school in the next couple of years. No school is using that library, but they are using part of the campus for the alternative high school. (Library type: School; collection size: very small)

We have struggled with the integration of ebooks and audiobooks with our ILS (when our subscription expires the record stays, etc.) but other than that everything has been fine. (Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 7)

While Destiny has its issues (mainly problems related to printing labels), I have been using it for so long (20 years) that I have adapted to its faults. (Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 8)

---

EOS.Web

top

We migrated to EOS in early 2024 and find it very robust and resourceful. Customer service is quick and helpful. They have an enhancement request area that we have submitted a few requests to. (Library type: Government Agency; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 8)

---

EOS.web

top

We only have our print items cataloged in EOS.web. All of our electronic journals and books are only activated in TDNet Discover knowledge base. (Library type: Medical; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 3)

---

EOS.Web

top

Library is currently locked into multiyear contract. At end of contract it is likely that we will migrate to a new ILS and vendor. College administration interested in implementing more OER/Open source options in all academic areas. We will most likely select a vendor with Open content options. (Library type: Academic; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 6)

---

Evergreen

top

Already using open source (Library type: Academic; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 8)

---

Evergreen -- Equinox

top

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

The migration to the Evergreen lost some information needed for the full scope of our annual state report, MARC information and other bits of information that have made it less than smooth. The system is extremely slow for patrons on our catalog computers, taking us back to days of dial up internet. As director, the reports are not user friendly, instead quite frustrating. The support from customer service has been great and that goes a long way in using their system. (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 5)

The system had a lot of issues with the way data migrated that caused some patron complaints about issues on their accounts and with the collection. The reports feature is also very difficult to use as the canned reports are not exactly customized to our needs and the basic reports is too complicated to create our own. More Spark- centric reports would be helpful. (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 5)

There needs to be more canned reports. Many libraries are running the same kind of reports, so having some things created that are easily accessible would be greatly appreciated. (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 3)

We are part of the SPARK/PaILS consortium using open-source Evergreen, so all our dealings are with the consortium, not any vendor. We are extremely satisfied with the responsiveness of the SPARK/PaILS personnel. The question about managing electronic resources is NOT APPLICABLE, thus the 0. Our electronic resources are all through our District Library Center, not part of our cataloged collection. (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 8)

I am a new director and have just started using Equinox for issues that arise. My lack of experience and interaction with Equinox will probably reflect in the rating. (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 7)

We are not using our ILS to manage e-resources. They are all side loaded through our discovery layer, Aspen. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 7)

I can't speak to the 3 unanswered survey questions as I have no information from staff members on their thoughts. These topics have not come up for discussion. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 9)

open source considerations: we already use an open source ILS (Evergreen), I do not envision ever migrating to an ILS that is not open source. (Library type: Public; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 9)

The reporter could be more user friendly and the reports server needs an upgrade. Only being able to process 2 reports at one time across all of the libraries who use it can result in very long wait times for output. The customer service has been exceptional. Elizabeth Davis's patience and assistance have been invaluable. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 7)

[...] (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 8)

Evergreen has been a great open source ILS for us for years now, with no plans on changing soon. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 8)

Can't comment at this time. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 6)

We had an open source ILS in the past and with the technology support in house, would never want to use open source again. (Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 7)

We get great support from Equinox Open Library Initiative. There are some functionalities we don't use such as acquisitions, and serials. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 8)

---

Evergreen -- Independent

top

Bibliomation responds directly to all of our member libraries' ILS support requests. We only reach out to a support vendor for emergent issues. Otherwise, we receive support for other members of the community. This survey is somewhat limiting for self-hosted libraries running open source platforms. (Library type: Consortium; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 8)

---

Evergreen -- MOBIUS

top

Just migrated to Evergreen with Mobius and we love it. Our electronic resources are only in our Summon service because of cost/space considerations for Evergreen and our consortium. (Library type: Academic; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)

We use Evergreen through our consortium, CWMARS. Individual libraries in our system don't interact with the ILS customer support. (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 7)

---

FOLIO

top

With the assistance of IndexData, we migrated from Virtua to FOLIO (and VuFind for our discovery interface) in February 2025. We've been very pleased with the level of service and support from IndexData. VuFind is somewhat limited, but it's sufficient for our needs at this point, and we anticipate investing some additional time and energy into improving the UX in FY26. (Library type: Independent Research; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 8)

Nuestra biblioteca implementó FOLIO en el año 2024 (Library type: Academic; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 9)

---

FOLIO -- EBSCO Information Services

top

We are the very first cohort to use OpenRS. It is still being built out. We migrated from a Sierra ILS to FOLIO, hosted by EBSCO, at the same time we switched to OpenRS. I am still convinced that open source is a better road long term than dependence on vendors who are subject to mergers and acquisitions. However, since there are no coders on my staff we are dependent on the open source community developers and the third party entities (K-INT for OpenRS, EBSCO for FOLIO, with the MOBIUS consortium managing the developer conversations). We were dependent on III before and their enhancement process was slow, so either way, we have to wait for enhancements. It has been a challenge to migrate to a system that, while it does some things very well, has not yet built out certain functions that we use daily. The most notable downgrades for us at this point are: -Lack of volume sorting (volumes in a set display in random order) -In-house use statistics -Print serials check-in -Item status codes (all our old status codes map to AVAILABLE, IN USE or NOT AVAILABLE) -Ability to designate non-consortial borrowing at the individual item level (there is a code in the item record, but its function hasn't been implemented yet) -Create Lists Things we like better with FOLIO: -Label printing -856 fields reside in holdings record rather than MARC bib record -When we get more fluency with LISTS and BULK EDIT and FOLIO adds more record type options, I think we are going to like certain things about updating groups of records. However, staff will need a more modern skill set to be able to use these features. As a manager, I see pros and cons to this. Good opportunity for skill building for the staff who can adapt, but I'm not sure all my staff can make the leap. We adopted EDS at the same time as all of this. It was pretty smooth to implement, and definitely helps with seamless discovery of our subscription databases. (Library type: Museum; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 7)

EBSCO's support through our migration to FOLIO was excellent. (Library type: Academic; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 7)

By 'implement an open source ILS', I assume you mean self-host. (Library type: Academic; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 8)

The consortium went live with the new system less than a year ago. A lot of the current satisfaction levels are framed around familiarity and comfort with the previous system. A lot of issues may be related to the quality, or preparation of, data migrated to the new system as opposed to the features and functions of the new system. Over time, as familiarity with the new system grows and features are rolled out, the rating are likely to improve. (Library type: Academic; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 5)

Some of these questions need an N/A option. While we can use FOLIO to handle our electronic resources, we have been using EBSCOadmin for longer and have kept the processes on that platform instead. (Library type: For-profit Educational; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 7)

A lot of our support queries are directed to the community rather than to the vendor. (Library type: Academic; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 8)

Note that we are not currently using FOLIO to manage our electronic resources. Also note that FOLIO is missing a lot of the functionality we're accustomed to in previous ILS, but we also know that FOLIO continues to evolve and we are hopeful that it will eventually meet and our expectations. Currently we spend more time than we would like on workarounds when the functionality we need is lacking. (Library type: Museum; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 5)

FOLIO is still a work in progress. While every release brings improvements, there are gaps in reporting and batch updates capabilities. Data importing is very finicky. Support is mostly good but some tickets linger because development work is needed. We also have the Locate catalog, from EBSCO, which also needs more robust functionality (ability to save & share search results, integration with citation tools like Zotero, etc). (Library type: Academic; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 6)

Staff and faculty report that FOLIO is far more robust than Sierra ever was - a big step up, particularly for acquisitions and ERM. However, Serials management was pretty much non-existent until the past release (Quesnelia), and even then, staff report that it still needs some work functionality-wise. However, given that we have an overall lesser number of serials subscriptions than we did in the past, this isn’t a huge barrier to functionality. The way all the ERM components easily link across different apps is really helpful to the entire electronic resource management process. However, staff report that the new Lists app is still woefully inadequate. For example, it is impossible to get a simple list of current fines owed with all of the relevant information. Staff report feeling like they have a good working relationship with EBSCO, and they’ve demonstrated commitment to supporting and improving FOLIO, and have been transparent about issues and their roadmaps. Regarding support, staff and faculty think EBSCO has been very responsive to most of our requests. They report never needing to follow up on a ticket because of no response on EBSCO's end - something that happens quite frequently with other vendors. Staff and faculty had a positive reaction to our implementation team, finding them very knowledgeable and very helpful. It's likely we would go through a migration with them again, if given the opportunity. (Library type: Academic; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 8)

Migration has not gone well; we have done multiple system migrations, and this is by far the worst. System lacks basic features and is a huge step backwards. (Library type: Academic; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 1)

Migration has not gone well; we have done multiple system migrations, and this is by far the worst. System lacks basic features and is a huge step backwards. (Library type: Theology; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 1)

I am really glad to have switched to FOLIO. It is still being developed so there will be changes but it is exciting to help shape the future developments of a library system. Development does take time so not all functions are as fleshed out but so far the developments has been promising, and the basic functions work great. Ebsco has been very helpful and we are happy with our vendor, consortium, and library system. (Library type: Academic; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 8)

Folio's print circulation functionality still isn't on a par with legacy systems that were primarily built for print circulation. On the one hand, not much of a problem as we're an academic library so print circulation is a small and declining part of our business, but on the other hand our staff who work in print circulation understandably consider print circulation of high importance. (Library type: Academic; collection size: large; ils satisfaction: 6)

While FOLIO may be a good product for individual institutions with robust systems' staff, the EBSCO FOLIO product developed for our consortium seems woefully under or undeveloped. It has been a frustrating experience that has required a massive amount of staff time and energy to do basic library tasks. We had a functioning system and we are now being asked to help build a system for a company through very painful trial an error and without compensation. Patrons who trusted us and our consortium for decades, have become very frustrated with the experience of using the catalog, requesting items from other libraries, and routinely running into unexpected issues. We are very unhappy with our new ILS so far but feel like we have few choices because of our size and dependence on our consortium. (Library type: Academic; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 2)

Just no AI, okay? (Library type: Academic; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 2)

FOLIO is a flexible system, but it is still in the process of consolidation. One factor that gives confidence in its growth in capacity, support and functionality in the coming years is that academic libraries with a wide reach throughout the world have implemented it, both with support from EBSCO, as well as from other providers or even in local installations, showing that it is a system that is not necessarily tied to EBSCO, offering different possibilities for institutions that wish to adopt it. FOLIO also allows the manipulation of information by the library with relative ease. The library has been able to approach the mechanisms that FOLIO uses, and ultimately the Internet, to communicate information through APIs, so FOLIO has been of great support in the integration with other platforms, as well as in the learning of these communication mechanisms by the library for the creation of customized solutions that can improve the user experience. It is expected that in the coming years, FOLIO will see its functionalities increase, as well as adopt new cataloging standards. Some of the basic functions still have some shortcomings, highlighting the impossibility of viewing the user's photograph when making a loan (since it requires viewing it in the user module), and making renewals by entering the item (since the renewal is done with the user identifier, while renewing by item code requires more clicks), as well as some details of the cataloging process that can make it unnecessarily complex for the acquisitions staff. Although these inconveniences have been noticeable for the staff, we also consider that other tasks related to the adjustment of information, configuration of policies, sending notifications to users, generation of quick lists, management of electronic collections (although this function is still in a very early phase) have provided the library with greater control over the data it safeguards and manages. In general, with the adoption of FOLIO some aspects have generated greater facilities, others are still in early development, which has posed challenges for both the library and the provider in generating solutions. Finally, different projects have been generated in which FOLIO plays a role directly or indirectly, being a tool of operational relevance, but also in terms of innovation needs. (Library type: Academic; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 8)

We are already using an Open source ILS, Folio. (Library type: Academic; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 6)

---

FOLIO -- Index Data

top

We migrated to FOLIO and VuFind (from Sierra and Encore Duet) in December 2024. FOLIO is a very different animal from Sierra. We migrated both due to the values alignment of an open-source system, and due to price concerns, and out of a desire for flexibility and choice. (In particular, Index Data supported our move to VuFind, which was especially important to meet discovery and OPAC needs for our Law Library.) Working with Index Data has been generally positive. They are responsive, and the size of the organization means that we can know people by name, work directly with engineers, have a meaningful conversation with the company founders at the Charleston Conference, and become meaningfully involved in parts of the open source community that matter to us. I am also strongly in favor of Index Data's approach of having an account contact who remains with us from the start of the migration project onward into regular maintenance. It is much preferrable to a more corporate approach of providing close one-on-one contact throughout the migration and then dumping the account over to a customer service portal that feels much less helpful. It's been difficult to train people on FOLIO. We've had to figure out a lot of things by a combination of talking to our vendor, talking to peer institutions, pulling from EBSCO training videos, and generally just messing around until we get it working. However, all-in-all, the migration went fairly smoothly. Reporting capabilities are challenging, and many of our staff have lost meaningful functionality now that we do not have access to Sierra's Create Lists module. (Library type: Academic; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 6)

We moved to FOLIO, hosted by Index Data, and managed by Fenway Library Organization, in 2024. Still working things out. (Library type: Academic; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 8)

---

Horizon

top

Product is getting too expensive given the functionality. LRM and sales support has significantly declined in the last 3 years. BlueCloud products were introduced in 2011 and are still do not meet our needs, we don't utilize any BlueCloud product except for Analytics and which is a downgrade from the deprecated WebReporter. The BC Mobile app was down for several months. (Library type: ; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 6)

We are part of a larger regional system which manages our automation services. I never work directly with the vendor. In our library's role of interaction with the system it meets our needs. (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 8)

We are starting to feel the need to pay closer attention to the ILS marketplace. 1.New ownership of SirsiDynix means that we are watching the trajectory of the company and the Horizon ILS closely. 2.We hope to be able over time to adopt new 'smart' technologies to improve our most labour-intensive processes and free up staff resources. We are worried that our ILS may hold us back by not supporting integration of new systems. (Library type: Public; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 7)

Overall we're pleased with our current ILS vendor. That being said, it would be really nice to see quicker and more comprehensive development of their "BLUEcloud" platform, since it's a decade old and still lacks features we use in the desktop software. (Library type: Consortium; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 8)

Some of our administration is not satisfied with the ILS, but direct library staff users are more satisfied. That said, we have learned to live with the ILS limitations, but realize their might be a better ILS on the market. We recently increased our support level with the vendor in order to have a dedicated ILS support person and that has improved our satisfaction level with service. (Library type: Public; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 7)

We will be undergoing an RFP process to verify the ILS market in terms of cost, workflows and functionality (Library type: Public; collection size: large; ils satisfaction: 7)

This question ("How effective is this product in managing your library's electronic resources?") is not relevant as we do not use it for this purpose. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 7)

Overall we are satisfied with SirsiDynix, with two exceptions: 1) slowness in developing the new mobile app, and 2) our SirsiDynix Visibility service provided through EBSCO being down from Sept. 2023 through Dec. 2024 and not fixed at the time of writing these comments. (Library type: Public; collection size: large; ils satisfaction: 7)

[...] (Library type: Academic; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 6)

SirsiDynix customer service is excellent. Our major frustration continues to be their focus on creating new products outside of the core ILSs, and the legacy products are getting farther and farther behind. It seems like recently they have gotten the message that this needs to change but the focus of development is on the needs of customers who subscribe to their expensive CloudSourceOA product rather than base Horizon or Symphony customers. (Library type: Academic; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 6)

Horizon has been a good solution for many years. However, the lack of development and the high cost mean that we are going to be moving to Koha/Aspen through Bywater solutions this year. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 2)

We are not using Horizon to manage electronic resources. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 9)

Horizon lacks good reporting functions; we have to use outside reporting tools to get the data we need. As it is an old program it does not deal with e resources very well. Horizon's lack of a proper password (only has 4 digit PIN) also is creating concern for the future and may trigger a migration to a more secure ILS. We have had a few instances of delays in support for issues implementing third party products. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 6)

SirsiDynix customer service is excellent. They respond to tickets quickly and are able to answer almost every issue. If a problem can’t be solved, it can be logged as a future enhancement. A Library Service Manager meets with our library twice a year to provide updates on the company’s direction and products in general as well as to review our products. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 7)

Horizon is a SQL based product and doesn't allow for extracting a ton of information directly from the interface, which means SQL knowledge is required to access information, which puts pressure on a very small number of staff. Overall the interface is poor and development seems to be lacking. My perception is that more development energy is directed into the BLUEcloud suite, but most of these products remain much less usable than the local client interface. (Library type: Public; collection size: large; ils satisfaction: 5)

---

Insignia

top

Overall, we are happy with the ILS. Customer support has been lacking the last few years and needs improvement. These concerns have been shared with the vendor. (Library type: School; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 7)

We like it because it’s Canadian owned. It suits a smaller Library system very well. The pricing is economic for small libraries. Pretty good customer service and interface. (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 8)

We like it because it’s Canadian owned. It suits a smaller Library system very well. The pricing is economic for small libraries. Pretty good customer service and interface. (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 8)

---

Koha

top

Due to current package subscription, there are limitations on enhancement or integration plans. However, the current version serves the basic operation needs of the Library until further plans to upgrade it. (Library type: Academic; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 6)

The library does not use external support for its management systems; support is provided jointly by library staff and the university's IT department. (Library type: Academic; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 8)

Koha is open source and fits our needs and budget. (Library type: Academic; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 8)

El proveedor Biblorion quién fue el encargado de realizar la migración de Aleph a Koha ya dejó de darnos servicio desde septiembre 2024. Estamos iniciando con un nuevo proveedor de soporte que es Infoestratégica. (Library type: Academic; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 5)

---

Koha -- ByWater Solutions

top

We do not have a dedicated systems librarian, so all of our troubleshooting and configuration needs have been directed to the vendor. There are some settings (like determining long lost overdue status for circulating items) that have to be submitted to the vendor, which can be frustrating. It's also not the most intuitive in terms of how settings/tools/administrative functions are organized, so it definitely takes getting used to. However, we also have some quirks of our own (special collections with particular circulation rules) that perhaps no ILS could fully satisfy. (Library type: Academic; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 6)

We use VuFind for our consortial shared catalog, not for discovery at the library. (Library type: ; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 8)

We find Koha to be an effective and economical solution. Bywater Solutions provides excellent customer support and the open source nature of Koha allows us to participate in customizing the system to work for us, with a lower overhead cost than would be needed for other types of ILS systems. (Library type: Consortium; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 9)

Happy with Koha and support (Library type: Special; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 8)

We currently use Koha, hosted by ByWater, and we plan to continue for the foreseeable future. (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 8)

Still paying for support services, cannot seem to get away from paying for support services as we find enhancements that keep us working with Koha support in collaborative ways. (Library type: Medical; collection size: large; ils satisfaction: 9)

[...] (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 7)

Koha is open source and that is what we use (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 7)

We use Koha, which is open source. We pay Bywater to manage (Library type: Academic; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 7)

There is little competition here. We have one up and at 'em company now, but ONE other is stringing lines to compete with our present provider. We have no details as to price and services yet. (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)

We are still in a transition phase with our new ILS. It has been a little bumpy, as one would expect. They are still trying to resolve issues with our call numbers and missing patron cards that were previously in the system. The customer service team is, however, extremely responsive. (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 6)

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

katana (Library type: Medical; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 9)

We switched to Koha in 2022 and have been very happy with both Koha and ByWater. (Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)

We do have an Open Source ILS - Koha via Bywater. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 7)

Our head librarian has retired! While we all miss her we carrying on with our wonderful volunteers ! I too, a former educator and director of a preschool am a volunteer! I worked under our librarian as her assistant! I unable to complete the questions asked in this survey at this time (Library type: Special; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 9)

I get most of my support through [...] and I would be lost without them. I haven't even ever had to access ByWater Solutions because [...] is so good. (Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)

[...] Library Services is 100% online (Library type: Consortium; collection size: large; ils satisfaction: 4)

Managing electronic resources is 0 because we do not do that. We subscribe to the [...] Library. (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 8)

We don't use Koha to manage electronic resources but the link to Overdrive holdings is very helpful! (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 8)

Koha/Aspen has always worked very well for our purposes (small rural public library serving 3000 year round/~6000 during the summer). We went through an anomalous period this year where a number of odd glitches were cropping up after a slew of updates, but the reps were highly responsive and helpful in getting things sorted out, and things have been much more stable since then. (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 8)

Koha is open source (Library type: Medical; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 8)

We migrated to Koha in February 2024 and have overall been very happy. There were some challenges with getting EDI ordering set up, and a few lingering issues, however all are now resolved and it is working well. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 8)

Community-Koha is a great product, is mature, and is very competitive with other ILSs and LMSs available to libraries. The justifications for these assertions include the usefulness of the modules of Koha, the comprehensiveness of the different library-related tasks that Koha can handle, the active development of the software, and the helpfulness and interest of Koha's network of user and support communities. The reason why I rated Koha at a 5 on the, "How effective is this product in managing your library's electronic resources?" question above is because I wish that Koha would directly API into OverDrive, Hoopla Digital, Gale databases, and other e-resource vendors to maintain a live index of those e-resources (including their availability for checkout), and empower my patrons to checkout and use those e-resources within Koha's OPAC. I am uncertain if any ILS or LMS can do that though. Aspen Discovery is a discovery service that come close to doing that and we are implementing Aspen next year. (Library type: Public; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 9)

For the product: Koha is an incredibly cost-effective ILS that does an excellent job managing physical resources. Flexibility is one of its strengths and has allowed us to develop and introduce new features such as a booking module, more flexible renewal rules, and improvements to acquisitions workflows. These features also become available to libraries using the software worldwide. That we own and can access our own data with an open-source ILS is another strength. Our vendor, ByWater Solutions, provides reliable hosting and high-touch support. Their development team has been an enthusiastic partner in realizing features we needed before migration and in continuously working on new features. Re: Electronic resources, we use our discovery layer to manage these rather than our ILS, so we skipped that question. (Library type: Public; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 7)

Our catalog does not cover our legal databases. Koha was our first and only online catalog system. We are very happy with it. (Library type: Law; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 9)

We were a bit disappointed in some responses to our tickets concerning our self-checkout SIP systems. Generally, we find ByWater's staff to be responsive to tickets initially, especially if they can solve it quickly or provide a needed report. They have also worked quickly to get an outage on the server resolved fast. That is great; but our tickets had some problems that couldn't be solved immediately and we were told they were referred on to other teams. Then the waiting for weeks began with little response and our self-checkout continued to remain shut down. We had to send follow up message to prompt responses and then a month later, it was found that there was a setting on Koha's side that, once it was addressed, quickly brought us back up. I'm glad we are up and running now, but we are scratching our heads wondering if the setting was that hard to find or whether our problem slid down the priority list. I have noticed similar problems with one of our instances of Libki. There is some hiccup that isn't apparent and we sent logs from our computers for ByWater to follow up with. Many months later, we have heard next to nothing. In short, our feelings are a little mixed about ByWater's service this past year and a half. Some great things, and some not so great things with trickier hiccups. (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 7)

We were a bit disappointed in some responses to our tickets concerning our self-checkout SIP systems. Generally, we find ByWater's staff to be responsive to tickets initially, especially if they can solve it quickly or provide a needed report. They have also worked quickly to get an outage on the server resolved fast. That is great; but our tickets had some problems that couldn't be solved immediately and we were told they were referred on to other teams. Then the waiting for weeks began with little response and our self-checkout continued to remain shut down. We had to send follow up message to prompt responses and then a month later, it was found that there was a setting on Koha's side that, once it was addressed, quickly brought us back up. I'm glad we are up and running now, but we are scratching our heads wondering if the setting was that hard to find or whether our problem slid down the priority list. I have noticed similar problems with one of our instances of Libki. There is some hiccup that isn't apparent and we sent logs from our computers for ByWater to follow up with. Many months later, we have heard next to nothing. In short, our feelings are a little mixed about ByWater's service this past year and a half. Some great things, and some not so great things with trickier hiccups. (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 7)

We contract with Bywater Solutions for support of the Koha ILS. Initially for the first several years after we migrated in late 2016 we were impressed with their customer support. However, in recent years, it seems support doesn't respond in a timely manner or in a way that truly addresses the problems we need support with. We feel this may be growing pains as Bywater has added more clients and also more provide support for more products than they initially did. At this time we are not considering migrating to a new ILS because overall we do like Koha and some of the upgrades have been fabulous. (Library type: Law; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 6)

We still believe in ByWater Solutions in the long term. There has been concern about a high level of turnover of staff in the short term. It raises questions about why a substantial number of staff left in a matter of months and how that expertise will be replaced, and retained. Support has been more reactive to proactive than in past years and the direction of the organization is murkier than we would like. Ultimately I think this company will figure out a better path forward, but it may just take a little bit. (Library type: Consortium; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 9)

Our library currently does not use the ERM functionality of Koha, which is why I provided a 0 for the question on effectiveness on managing electronic resources. (Library type: Academic; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 9)

Our experiences with Koha and Aspen as Open Source ILS products favorably influences us. We would definitely be open to other Open Source software products that are as robustly supported. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 9)

Some key staff members left our Koha support vendor for other opportunities in 2024. It's a tad disconcerting each time another leaves. Thorough knowledge of Koha and its ever-evolving bugs takes time to gain. It has become clear over our time on the system that libraries using Koha need to have staff with strong technology skills. Self-reliance and participation in the Koha community and user groups is a key to success, even if you hire a support vendor. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 7)

---

Koha -- Equinox

top

We just made the migration a few months ago, but so far, we are loving our new Koha ILS. It is so much easier to catalog books and has several new functions that we didn't have with our former ILS - at at a fraction of the annual price. (Library type: Academic; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)

Open Source Considerations: We have Koha which is open source (Library type: Museum; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 7)

---

Koha -- Independent

top

we don't know how to use the acquisitions module of the koha program. It would be nice if it was easier in this regard. (Library type: National; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 5)

We are using VuFind as discovery system. So far records from Koha and Xref are displayed in VuFind, but we plan to show records from AtoM and Primus/Digitalt museum as well. (The survey page seems to be malfunctioning. Some answers don't stick) (Library type: Music; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 7)

With regards to the question about electronic resources management in ILS, we do not use Koha for this purpose. We manage our own Koha-installation, so we do not have a vendor company. Concering "Open Source Considerations", we did not answer because we already have an open source system (Library type: Academic; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 7)

---

Koha -- National Library of Finland

top

We are a ILS user and also a service provider, some of the questions do not apply (Library type: National; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 8)

---

Koha -- PTFS Europe

top

This library currently uses the open source ILS Koha (Library type: ; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 7)

PTFS Europe was responsible for the data migration and upgrade of the library catalog based on Koha open-source from 3.22 to 23.11 version. The company is currently in charge of the maintenance and hosting of the catalog. I would recommend the implementation of an open-source software for a small-medium library such as the one at [...] (Library type: Academic; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 8)

---

Libero

top

Have used several library software systems at several libraries and (of course) they all do the same thing; know nothing about open source options; no budget available to consider migrating to a new system (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 7)

---

Liberty

top

We are starting the process of migrating to Polaris this year. I like the Softlink team but the Liberty product does not suit our needs as a public library. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 4)

---

Libib

top

Libib is a non-standard ILS that is not MARC-compliant. However, it is an effective and highly affordable system for small libraries which is why we went with it (Library type: ; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 8)

---

Library.Solution

top

I spend more time looking for a report that will give me the information I need than it took me to create a report in our previous system. We are scheduled to go to a new version of our current software which is supposed to make it easier for people who don't know MARC records to create new records but it will limit what catalogers can do. This effects records for electronic resources since we will no longer be able to correct records directly but will have to go back to the original MARC file on a local PC, have a MARC editor on the local computer, correct the file and upload it again. Most electronic services send a MARC file with the months deleted items that we can overwrite the items in our database so they will no longer show in our OPAC. With the new system we will not be able to do this. We will have to send the file to TLC to have them do it. I don't know if this will delay getting these items overlayed and if they will let us know when the file has been run. I'm just skeptical about whether this new version is an improvement or something that will make more work for staff. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 8)

Great company! Easy to navigate and superior customer service. (Library type: For-profit Educational; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)

Every time TLC updates its ILS, it breaks something or makes something harder. Their cataloging module is full of errors. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 2)

[...] (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 9)

There are trade-offs with any system, but in their effort to make our system easy for people to use (small libraries frequently lack the depth of expertise that large libraries have), we have "dumbed down" capabilities. For example, an "upgrade" removed our ability to work directly with MARC records. Report writing is also somewhat limited. (Library type: Consortium; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 6)

The system works fine, though it is very barebones yet still confusing. It is also frustrating having to refer to a separate branch to fix minor issues such as number swaps or misspellings within the digital catalogue when previously it could be done in-house through systems like POLARIS/LEAP. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 3)

Very happy with the ILS and the company interactions are always very positive. I think their support is exemplary. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 9)

TLC has been an excellent ILS vendor to work with. We migrated to TLC this past year and the support provided was excellent. The weekly meetings during implementation with multiple staff members from TLC along with the step-by-step implementation and training far exceed any other vendor I have worked with. We are extremely pleased that we have migrated to this system. (Library type: Consortium; collection size: large; ils satisfaction: 9)

The clear distinction between patron and item records has dramatically helped our system, since our last vendor, Follett, didn't separate the two numbering systems. We also lost books and information with Follett. LS is a learning curve since it is more database-driven, but I know the staff will love the KIDS catalog for non-readers. (We just left Follet 12/31/24 so we are currently starting to work with Library Solutions.) (Library type: School; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 8)

There are a lot of issues in LS Cataloging that need fixing. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 6)

The support from The Library Corporation (TLC) is superb. TLC made it easy to migrate from our previous ILS to their ILS. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 9)

TLS is a powerful program consisting of several modules. However, the staff-facing interfaces are clunky, and certain functions require either third party software or at the least, switching between modules, which is cumbersome. Cataloging is a particular sore point, as third party software is necessary to edit MARC records. While some limited editing can be done within the Library software, there are a few edits (especially in series names) that do not "stick;" the MARC record information overwrites the edits made within the library software. Authority controls, ostensibly based on OCLC controlled vocabulary, often do not recognize names which are, in fact, OCLC authoritative. Newer vocabularies, such as FAST headings, are not recognized. In order to use them, each library must create local authority records. If a MARC record is imported and an item is created, and then persistent errors based on the original MARC record are discovered, the item and title must be deleted in order to reimport the corrected MARC record. However, new items come in with the status of "in Processing," and cannot be deleted. The cataloger has to exit the cataloging module, go to the staff circulation module and check the item in, and then return to cataloging to delete the title and item. Then, in third party software, edit the original MARC record and, finally, re-import it into the library software. Cumbersome. Within the staff circulation module, the default data that is displayed for items (on the lists and items page) is not in a very useful order, and this default must be changed every time. There is no way to specify that the most relevant information for my work is barcode, title, author, and shelf location and have that configuration saved. Instead, each time I go into that module, I have to reset the order of the categories or face a great deal of left to right scrolling in order to see the data I want. Frustrating. (Library type: School; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 5)

Generally, I feel that Library.Solution 5x is a product that would be a good match for small public or school libraries (especially those without dedicated cataloging staff) but is not a good fit for us and is struggling to fully move service to the Web. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 3)

We like our ILS vendor; the they are always responsive to specific issues, and are generally patron-focused (the PAC, despite missing some features, is one of the more friendly ones out there). However, there are some features that are now available in other ILS products that we would like to see implemented, and that are not on their current roadmap. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 7)

---

LibraryWorld

top

We are a tiny rural library in a town of under 300 people. Our current ILS probably wouldn't be sufficient for a large library, but it has the features we need at a cost we can afford. (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 8)

I've not had any contact with our ILS customer service myself, but I think they are pretty good? And we are not considering a new ILS at the moment- too much upheaval. (Library type: Public; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 7)

---

Locally developed

top

edited comment (Library type: Academic; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 9)

---

None

top

the new version of verso is difficult. the old version was much easier to use. (Library type: Public; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 7)

We currently do not have any of this in our library. (Library type: Public; collection size: small)

---

OCLC Wise

top

I don't think immediate change is very likely, and through the consortium we are committed to their choice. (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 8)

OCLC Wise is still in development and they are working on a lot of features that we are eagerly looking forward too, but it has been a slow process which has been a little frustrating for frontend staff. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 6)

OCLC has spent the last three years building this product on the backs of the 18 libraries in this consortium and, from the perspective of most consortium members, it has been a horrendously inept experience with unnecessary changes in terminology and procedures. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 1)

OCLC Wise is part of the Flemish Digital Library ecosystem managed by Cultuurconnect, so it is only one product in Cultuurconnect's service-oriented architecture. Considering the question about 'Electronic resources': these are managed in other platforms; content is searched or browsed in our library websites platform, viewed in the content vendor's platform identification, and authentication and authorization are provided by the My Library-service which checks library membership through the OCLC Wise API. (Library type: Consortium; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 8)

---

OPALS

top

OPALS has served my small academic library well and has been a great value. However, if my institution were larger or had more of a focus on research activity, we would probably need a product with better abilities to manage holds, serials, and electronic resources. (Library type: ; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 7)

OPALS is designed for schools. Too much of it favors school operations and datapoints that aren't useful for public libraries, and the report functionality is severely under-developed for our needs. It has caused much mutual pain on both sides (customer and vendor) to try to make it work simultaneously for our local school libraries and public libraries. The public libraries are moving on. School libraries seem quite happy with it. (Library type: ; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 0)

Opals is perfect for our library so I cannot picture considering a change unless they were to close down. (Library type: Church; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 9)

This system serves our small academic library well. It is standards based, harmonizes print and digital resources at a cost that is sustainable while providing excellent hosting and customer support when needed. (Library type: Academic; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)

Our library migrated to OPALS in 2024. Discontent with our previous technology prompted our quest which led us to a system used and recommended to us by librarians nearby. The data transfer and learning curve were amazingly easy, and if we need to contact them, they answer the phone and know who we are or reply to emails within 30 minutes, often less than 10 ! (Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)

We had to move our library data from another system to one that suits our historical archives and printed book collection. The system had to be standards-based, hosted and well supported. Our research led us to the OPALS community which uploaded our records free of charge, enabling us to evaluate their programme using our library data. That experience and our interaction with their support team confirmed our research. The system does more than expected and their services surpassed expectations. (Library type: Museum; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)

Please note that we implement the OPALS Union Catalog version of the software for the purposes of facilitating inter-library loan. It is excellent for our workflow, and we have no plans to migrate to another platform at this time. These survey responses reflect the inter-library loan union catalog interface, and not the company's branch level library software. That being said, those membership libraries that are implementing the "branch-level software have indicated their satisfaction with it. (Library type: Consortium; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 9)

OPALS is new to us. We observed how well it worked in a neighboring school district. After evaluating the demonstration system they set up for us, and experiencing their services, we transitioned. Our students love the discovery search buffet of resources that the OPAC delivers, and we have worked with them and SORA to integrate the Overdrive API with OPALS discovery search. (Library type: School; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 9)

Our district moved to OPALS this school year. We left a system that was no longer working for us and where support was lacking. The new system is outstanding and includes so many integrated utilities that we used to purchase from other companies. Their database discovery search and database access interface has a customized listing that our young readers love to use, and display options for teachers and parents. They also fix database authentication issues that used to take weeks to resolve, if ever.... and the annual support and hosting fee is less ! (Library type: School; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 9)

Our small college library needed to explore an alternative library automation system. Our search narrowed to OPALS which, at no cost, set up a fully functional system and uploaded our 40,000 plus existing MARC records within two days of that request. Their data processing staff fixed some record inconsistencies followed by free tutoring by a professional, academic librarian. Three weeks after our initial request, the system was fully operational and at an annual cost that was 35% less than our previous system. This is an awesome system and community! (Library type: Academic; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)

OPALS works with our regional school library services organization supporting all print and 80 digital resource services. Our students have 24/7 discovery search and single sign on access from anywhere to authentic information databases, eBook collections and streaming video, preparing them for higher education and lifelong learning. The technology is easy to use, although we know how complex this is "under the hood" and satisfied that all of this is so well managed by our partners. (Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)

Our consortium and the program developers manage our library automation services. These include discovery search, single sign on access to databases, homepage management, ILL services, print resource circulation and advance booking. Services are dependable and updates keep pace with the past twelve years changes. This support enables us to focus on literacy and supporting student and teacher instruction. (Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)

We switched systems to OPALS two years ago. The program has so many integrated features. In the past, we needed to pay a fee to access these if they were available or purchase them from a third party. Their services are outstanding, which we have learned is just as important as the product. (Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)

Notre coopérative agricole offre des services d’information à un grand nombre d’agriculteurs. Ce système Web leur permet de faire des recherches dans notre bibliothèque, de consulter des documents numériques et de commander des documents imprimés que nous pouvons leur envoyer. Notre mission s'inscrit parfaitement dans la culture libre logiciel" d'OPALS. (Library type: Special; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 9)

Ce programme de gestion de bibliothèque fait tout ce dont notre bibliothèque scolaire a besoin pour fournir des ressources de lecture à nos élèves. Le service à la clientèle est inégalé et les coûts de service n'ont pas augmenté une seule fois depuis qu'on a commencé à l'utiliser il y a 12 ans. (Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)

Our experience with this open source system developer and provider has been positive. Librarians generally cannot support open source hosting or maintenance, neither can their IT support staff. We are happy to find OPALS which is a great system supported by a competent core of programmers, tech support and professional librarians. (Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)

Our school library has used OPALS for 17 years! There are no other programs in our school that have remained relevant for so long. With yearly updates, it never grows old. (Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)

We maintain a virtual library to support physicians, employees, and students. We collect resources to support the areas of patient care, professional work, research and education. OPALS manages these media formats and facilitates access at a sustainable .cost. (Library type: Medical; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 9)

OPALS est un excellent système qui nous aide à bien servir les membres de notre communauté. Leurs services sont rapides et courtois. (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)

Our medical library focuses on a specific surgical procedure and is referenced by physicians and students. The institution considers this service important enough to be administered by MLIS staff and we are very satisfied to have this technology to assist us. (Library type: Medical; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 9)

Our members are so pleased we returned to OPALS. (Library type: Theology; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)

This Institute is an academic training centre dedicated to the study of philosophy and theology under the guidance of Saint Thomas Aquinas. Three years ago, we adopted OPALS and have used it to double the number of catalogued rare books, and have digitized and added manuscripts and other valuable documents. The system is adaptable to our unusual library vocation and the catalogue facilitates students' research and access. The system is reliable, comprehensive and supported well. (Library type: Theology; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)

The system provides professional library services well. Our computer science / engineering college students still read books as well as online digital information. The system makes it easy for us to manage what we have and provide access to these research resources. (Library type: Academic; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 9)

We migrated from a large cost, complex to use system to OPALS. The data transfer was managed well and they did not charge for that service. Their librarian/instructor was outstanding. This is our second semester using the system. So far, we are not missing any previous system functionality. The system is nimble and intuitive for catalogers and student research. We look forward to reporting our experience next year! (Library type: Academic; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)

This is our second year using this system. The first year data migration to OPALS was easy and we were tutored well by a professional librarian. We only needed technical support once in this, our second year, and response and resolution was prompt. They add a surprising number of system updates several times a year although the service, updates and hosting costs did not increase, unlike all our other overhead costs! (Library type: Theology; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)

Our library now supports two other campuses. The system supports us well and manages inter library loans efficiently. (Library type: School; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 9)

The library committee for our organization decided to adopt OPALS six years ago. Some of our members had worked at large libraries and had high standards. They have not been disappointed. (Library type: Special; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 9)

This is our second year using OPALS in our school district libraries. Happy to report that the system and customer support are still first class. We are using our cost savings to add reading resources for our students. This year, a neighboring district and another private school in our area decided to make the change! (Library type: School; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 9)

Please note that we implement the OPALS Union Catalog version of the software for the purposes of facilitating inter-library loan. It is excellent for our workflow, and we have no plans to migrate to another platform at this time. These survey responses reflect the inter-library loan union catalog interface, and not the company's branch level library software. That being said, those membership libraries that are implementing the "branch-level software have indicated their satisfaction with it. (Library type: Consortium; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 9)

OPALS is not really open source although it often makes the open source lists. I can't say enough good things about the software. It's amazing bang for the buck, even if I would like a little more razzle-dazzle for the home page sometimes. (Library type: School; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 8)

We switched to OPALS this school year and are enjoying the many integrated features that were "a la carte" or had to be purchased from a third party with the system we had used for years. The system is reliable and their service is awesome! (Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)

This is one of our top, long term (15 years) vendors! Their program does what's needed and service is awesome. (Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)

Nos bénévoles travaillent avec les enseignants qui identifient les élèves ayant besoin de cours de rattrapage en lecture. Ce programme d'automatisation de bibliothèque donne accès aux ressources nécessaires pour réaliser notre mission. Il est très adaptable à nos besoins, très bien supporté et durable pour nos budgets modestes. (Library type: Special; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 9)

The library’s collection includes books, plans, photographs, and artifacts relating to the maritime heritage. These are held in a circulating collection of books as well as in an archive of rare books, printed matter, sail and ship plans, photographs, film, and digital resources. All of these resources and artifacts are catalogued using OPALS which has served us well. (Library type: Museum; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 9)

Our consortium provides ILL services, advance booking & delivery services for an extensive STEM / multiple titles collection, and database management services including SSO and discovery searching for 90 school libraries. We have started into our 20th year growing and innovating with the OPALS team. (Library type: Consortium; collection size: large; ils satisfaction: 9)

Our library, used by approximately 1,000 lower and upper school students and faculty, started using OPALS around 2011. The program provides whimsical, engaging children's catalogue searching interfaces that prepare the foundations for upper school students use of the advanced catalogue and bibliographic citation utilities equipping them for university. The OPALS team is wonderful, responding promptly to any service requests and providing so many updates aligning the system with our changing resources and curriculum. (Library type: School; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 9)

This program and those serving it deserve top ratings, compared with past technology experiences. We are a small library, serving a research community requiring proper bibliographic the cataloging and OPAC functionality of large academic libraries. (Library type: Special; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)

We appreciate being able to guide OPALS development. They sponsor users group meetings where they actually listen to our suggestions and implement them. Finally, they have not increased support fees since we started using the system 16 years ago. This is unique among all our service suppliers. (Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)

Our libraries are members of a consortium working with the OPALS group since 2008 to provide our library automation services. These include OPAC, circulation, cataloging, database access and discovery searching and inter library loan service. (Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)

Ours is a small library with a small budget. OPALS provides all the features others around us receive and from what we hear, superior service, at a much lower cost. (Library type: School; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 9)

Our school library system consortium and the OPALS group support our school library technology services. They provide timely, reliable and awesome support! (Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)

Our district continues to experience consistently responsive IT support and library system satisfaction. White glove service for over a decade and no service fees increases; an amazing open source community! (Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)

Our library has used OPALS for 16 years. Service is outstanding and questions answered often within minutes. The system even manages authentication access and seamless discovery searching to our numerous digital resources. (Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)

Our small elementary school library manages thousands of loan transactions, resource acquisitions, and provides library OPAC and literacy instructions. OPALS technology is my efficient assistant that makes all this possible. (Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)

Our library vocation necessitates conservation and cataloging current and obsolete resource formats which OPALS handles elegantly. We appreciate the system's integrated library Webpage / portal utilities which has been accessed 4,885,424 since we started using this system. Excellent system and customer support! (Library type: Special; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 9)

We continue to endorse this system. It serves the cultural and educational library resources used by our community well and is well supported whenever we need assistance. (Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)

Our regional union catalog coordinates interlibrary loan transactions for 95 school libraries. OPALS DPS also provides discovery search and single sign on database authentication for these schools to access the hundreds of information databases to which they subscribe. We count on OPALS staff to help resolve multiple vendor database authentication issues that arise randomly as vendors switch providers or modify their technology. (Library type: School; collection size: large; ils satisfaction: 9)

We switched to OPALS around 2017 along with other libraries in our district. We serve K-9 students. OPALS has several OPAC interfaces that truly align with beginners and those who are ready for more advanced search options. Their techs configured the ILL features enabling us to share our resources without having post it note reminders on our monitors. The OPALS team rocks! (Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)

It's a challenge to changes systems. We know we made the right decision with OPALS and love it !!! Students use the catalog and staff manages cataloging, circulation, and its built in library Webpage. There are so many features that other libraries in our region do not have. (Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)

We had to transition from another system. Their technical support staff transferred our data and provided training enabling us to provide library services to our students from the beginning of the school year. The "forced" migration brought us to a much better system and responsive service. (Library type: School; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 9)

OPALS manages our high school print and digital database resources. OPALS discovery search provides access to approximately 20,000 books and handles 24/7 authentication to 52 information databases. Our consortium and OPALS maintain authentication and access which is something we could not possibly do on our own. (Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)

We rely on OPALS to manage our print and database resources. Our IT department also uses their system to manage over 1,000 Chromebooks and TI calculators. Their service is prompt and courteous and when we do need help, they know who we are! (Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)

Our OPALS implementation from another program was seamless. John provided great training, and subsequently the team responded promptly to any questions. Even though we are a small school library, we are treated with dignity and never in a queue! (Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)

Patron data privacy is a major concern for our small library community. Our security auditors have assured us that the OPALS team has implemented standards that protect that data. In addition, their programmers developed a transaction anonymization utility that enables us to protect our library members. The OPALS support team is so responsive! (Library type: School; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 9)

Our library resources include 77 digital information databases including streaming video and eBooks. OPALS discovery search and single sign on authentication makes it easy for students to find diverse sources to support their research assignments and any personal questions they might have. We could not configure this service on our own and are thankful for our regional library service consortium and OPALS technicians that keep this running. (Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)

Our regional consortium serves 75 libraries, providing inter-library loan, resource sharing services. The system enables our school librarians to simultaneously request dozens of a title's copies (for their book clubs or English teachers), from multiple locations. The system electronically keeps track of the responder and requestor transactions, prints packing slips and accommodates exceptional processing circumstances. These features were developed by our open source system provider in response to how we manage services in our region. We and other consortia in our state also worked with them to develop a discovery search and database single-sign-on technology used by over 1,000 libraries in our state. (Library type: School; collection size: large; ils satisfaction: 9)

Our library started using OPALS in 2014. We appreciate that the system adapts to our language and culture. We also value that each year, there are updates that improve our services. Finally, the support and training they provide is polite and competent. (Library type: School; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 9)

Had used OPALS at a previous library. After moving to another town... inherited a different (well known) system, that while adequate, informed that "one does not know what one's got, 'till it's gone" Gave it a few years to be sure with colleagues then collectively decided to adopt OPALS. Great system and to be back where everyone knows our names. (Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)

I am retiring this year and want to commend the OPALS team for our nine year working experience. I am so glad our school found this exemplary software and and service provider. It has been a pleasure working with them. (Library type: School; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 9)

We love OPALS! We just renewed our annual support and update agreement. Ours is a small school library, that switched to OPALS two years ago. The transition was amazingly easy, we were trained by a professional librarian. Technical support is prompt and respectful. Very nice to fly "first class" on a "coach" budget! (Library type: School; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 9)

We and our members continue to be satisfied with OPALS. The system is reliable, frequently updated, and support is prompt and courteous. (Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)

OPALS system and support manages our complicated assortment of information databases very well. Our students use the discovery search and authenticate access all our resources 24/7. (Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)

Love Opals! Very reasonably priced and excellent customer service. I was relieved when I accepted a new librarian position and found out they use Opals. (Library type: School; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 9)

Awesome technology and support. We implemented their discovery search which delivers search results for the print collection and provides single sign on access to our database collections and a curated collection of over 40,000 selected education websites for our teachers and students. (Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)

Our library adopted OPALS seven years ago. The system manages our book collection as well as 25 Gale, Ebsco Britannica reference, and streamning video databases. Although database vendors sometimes change links or hosting services that randomly interrupt access, OPALS technicians are quick to communicate with them to restore access. Remarkable how they advocate for us. (Library type: School; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 9)

OPALS manages our business college library. It is a reliable system and the cost is sustainable. Customer support is outstanding! (Library type: Academic; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 9)

Our school library is in Southeast Asia. We have used OPALS for ten years. Although we are 14,500 km from where our system is hosted, we cannot remember it ever not working. When classes of 25 or more students borrow books, the system processes them speedily. If we need to communicate with them, it is usually to learn how to do something that is not a daily task and an well informed instructor responds promptly. (Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)

Our archival library only catalogues print format holdings. This system manages our collection very well and service, when needed is responsive. The public catalogue interface is intuitive. Our researchers easily find needed documents and appreciate the integrated bibliographic citation utility to record their sources. (Library type: Special; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)

We started using OPALS in 2008. The system manages our library, digital resources, student laptops, and textbooks. The program updates have kept pace with resource and IT changes. Two things have not changed: outstanding support, and the cost ! (Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)

This system continues to evolve. It manages access to print and digital resources providing our students and teachers 24/7 access to research resources. Customer service is outstanding. (Library type: School; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 9)

We have been very happy with the support that OPAS provides. All software has glitches, of course, but the response time, ease, and quality of personnel, make resolving issue easy at OPALS (Library type: School; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 8)

For me, the service provided by the company and its employees tops the list for me as they are always there when I need them while being supportive of our specific needs too. Second would be the product interface and operability for the end user, it is customizable in so many ways using a variety of tools/functions. 5 Stars Deserved, thank you. (Library type: Consortium; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 9)

Very pleased with the level of customization available to the Home Page. Support, when infrequently needed, is rapid and effective. Company prefers customers use email to contact support in all but very rare instances. I've often found that during creation of the written description (with snipped screen images added) I solve my own problem. If there is a programming issue at their end, however, it is promptly addressed. The many brief online instructional videos are extremely useful and answer many questions. If further guidance is needed for a specific issue, support staff are prompt in setting up brief one-on-one online instruction. (Library type: Church; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 8)

OPALS is proactive in anticipating needs of their clients. They are also incredibly responsive and collaborative to feedback and creative improvements. (Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)

OPALS/Media Flex is an outstanding ILS! We have never had any issues during our many years working with them. We would highly recommend OPALS! (Library type: Government Agency; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)

We are very happy with the technical support from [...] with helping clean up our records. (Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 8)

[...] (Library type: School; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 8)

OPALS system is easy to use for all students in our K-12 building. The staff are always responsive to any questions or concerns I have and solve my issues very quickly! (Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)

I am writing to share my extremely positive experience with the OPALS library system. As a user of this platform, I have found it to be an invaluable resource for both our school and district. What sets OPALS apart is not just their excellent software, but also their exceptional leadership. CEO Harry Chan's hands-on approach to customer service is remarkable. His direct involvement demonstrates the company's commitment to their clients' success and satisfaction. One aspect I particularly appreciate is OPALS' receptiveness to customer feedback and suggestions. They actively listen to their users and seem genuinely interested in continuously improving their platform to better serve the educational community. Throughout our time using OPALS, we have experienced seamless operation with no technical issues. The system's reliability and user-friendly interface have made it an essential tool for our library management needs. I wholeheartedly recommend OPALS to any educational institution looking for a robust, reliable library system. The combination of excellent software, outstanding customer service, and responsive leadership makes OPALS an exceptional choice for schools and districts. (Library type: School; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 9)

OPALS is consistently a reliable ILS for all my school library collection management needs. I started with OPALS back in 2007 at a former school and brought it to my former district, and in 2018 I brought it to my new district. It has all the "bells & whistles" you need and is easy to use. From circulation to cataloging to inventory and reports, OPALS does it all. It even hosts my website in the tabs on the home page. OPALS stays current with the digital technologies of today with seasonal updates throughout the year. In the rare event one needs support, the MediaFlex team at OPALS is friendly, helpful and they answer their own emails and calls on the spot. It is no surprise that OPALS is the best ILS in the industry and deserves this high honor! (Library type: School; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 9)

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

Having used OPALS since 2008, I can say that it is a fabulous product. It is incredibly user-friendly. In addition, OPALS has superior tech support and they are incredibly responsive and willing to adapt the product to the end users needs. (Library type: School; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 9)

OPALS is the most amazing, library-centered, responsive vendor I have ever worked with in the field of library automation. They are a cost-effective, customer-oriented provider who provides cutting edge automation services. We will never change our automation provider. We truly feel like part of the OPALS family. They work to protect the interests of patrons and librarians and always put the priority on people, not profit. Thank you to the OPALS/MediaFlex team for all they do for our libraries every day. (Library type: Consortium; collection size: large; ils satisfaction: 9)

We're very happy with OPALS. It is easy to use. The customer service is very helpful. They keep updating the software and making it better, and they also provide great training. (Library type: Special; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 8)

OPALS and Mediaflex have provided top notch customer service. I receive helpful and timely response to my needs. Highly recommended. (Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 8)

It is my annual privilege to honor and thank Media Flex! Their OPALS system is exactly what we need, and their customer support/kindness is outstanding. For about 15 years of partnership, my appreciation for them only grows, which is saying a lot. You will be in good hands if also choosing MediaFlex! (Library type: Special; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 9)

---

Polaris

top

At a consortium level we've begun investigating alternatives and had presentations from Bywater (Koha) and SparkPA (Evergreen) (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 6)

Polaris as a whole is not easy to work with. It does the job, but like most library vendors, it has a monopoly on library systems and as such seems unresponsive to our needs, especially if you are a smaller system like ours. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 5)

While open to considering open source options in the future, we're not confident that we'd be able to take full advantage of customizations in-house and would most likely require additional support, cutting down on the savings of open source. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 7)

I only put a 5 in the prior question because I'm only 58 with an MSLS, not a MSLIS. I had to research what an open source ILS even means. Once I researched it, it became clearer what it actually is and entails. I chose a 5 in prior response, because I'm not a decision-maker in regard to tech and how it's utilized, applied, modified, configured, etc. That's for Admin & IT to figure out. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 8)

We are currently under an RFP for our ILS. We would have considered an open-source solution through a company that services one, but received no such bids. (Library type: Public; collection size: large; ils satisfaction: 8)

"Library of Things" (circulating technology or objects) are a popular and growing set of public library resources. Polaris doesn't allow for the special nature of these collections and so we are forced to treat them like print resources, which causes difficulty. Score for Things resources handling - 5/9. (Library type: Consortium; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 8)

We love working with Polaris (the product and support), but our funding situation will be changing drastically over the next couple years and is forcing us to look at areas in which we might be able to save some money in our budget. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 9)

Polaris Product Support is responsive and helpful, but any issue they can't solve has an extremely low chance of resolution. As far as R&D is concerned, if a new feature behaves the way they designed it, then it is perfect, and any issues customers might have with it are "enhancements" to be entered in the lottery IdeaLab. More than once, new features have created rather than saved work for my library because they make mistaken assumptions about our workflow and aren't implemented in a way that allows them to be turned off if they're not useful. We have struggled as well with communication from the CloudOps team, which does not let us know when they are going to do maintenance or when there has been an outage (although this is par for the course for every other online vendor). I have third party monitoring so that I know when our services are down. To repeat, Polaris is very stable and we like LEAP for circulation staff. The front-line product support staff are quick to respond, organized and do their best to advocate. But any library considering Polaris should carefully test all their scenarios, because if something doesn't work, it's unlikely to be fixed. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 7)

Responses provided reflect, and are limited to, the Circulation functions of the ILS. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 8)

Overall our experience with Innovative has been very positive. The quality of customer service has been exceptionally responsive, and the products function efficiently and are easy to use. We have only recently migrated to the Innovative suite of products, and could not be happier with our decision. (Library type: Public; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 8)

All communication with vender is online through support tickets and email. Vendor response is very slow when we encounter problems. (Library type: Academic; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 7)

We switched from The Library Corporation to BCCLS, a consortium of 78 libraries in Bergen County about a year ago. So far we have no plans to make any changes while we are undergoing a major construction project. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 8)

The library is a user of a system maintained by our county library - we do not (and will not) have the resources to host or manage our own system. (Library type: Academic; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 4)

We have only had this new catalog since October -- so we are new to the procedures, process, etc. So far all the service and the ILS have been great! (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 9)

Right now we are still completing implementation of a discovery layer. We are not in a position to consider an ILS change right now. (Library type: Consortium; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 6)

---

Sierra

top

We had significant tech issues with our current ILS desktop application which have finally been resolved...at least for now. It generally meets our needs at this time. The main reasons we would move to a new ILS are a stronger web-based staff client to sidestep our desktop app issues, a built-in or cheaper discovery layer bundle to improve our user experience, and cost, cost, cost. (Library type: Law; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 6)

We are in the process of migrating from Sierra to Alma. The above is entered for Sierra as that is our current ILS. So far, although the migration process is arduous, Alma does appear to be more in line with our current needs. (Library type: ; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 5)

Sierra's OS that we are running locally is end-of-lifed, so we are looking at moving to a hosted platform to move to a different OS. Hopefully within the next month or so. Campus IT seems to want to move as many things to hosted as possible but interest is not as urgent as we originally thought it might be. While the Sierra 6.x releases are making some long-needed improvements, there is always the possibility that Alma might be of interest, even with out 6 campus school district and the one remaining public library, but the real question in today's economy, do we campus funding for a drawn out procurement process and completely new system migration over 12-18 months, so we are less optimistic that an RFP could be negotiated at this point. The move to hosted Sierra is a bit of a stopgap, but at a fraction of the cost. (Library type: Academic; collection size: large; ils satisfaction: 7)

We are given the ILS by the county and have little control of it. (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 3)

[...] (Library type: Consortium; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 7)

Just noting that we are currently in migration to Alma/Primo, going live in June 2025. The survey responses reflect our current production ILS, Sierra. (Library type: Consortium; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 2)

I am very satisfied with our ILS and desire to remain with Sierra as long as possible. However, I understand that the business merger with Proquest may mean end-of-life for Sierra eventually. So I am keeping an eye on EBSCO Folio. I am not interested in OCLC WMS whatsoever. (Library type: Theology; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 9)

We have contracted with Clarivate to move to Polaris with Vega by the end of 2025. Sierra did not work for us as we'd hoped 13+ years ago. We have good hopes that Polaris will meet our needs more effectively. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 6)

[...] (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 8)

We feel WMS will only be considered as a last resort because it does not have much functionality. We would probably prefer ALMA for its functionality but can't afford it. FOLIO seems like a good fit. (Library type: Academic; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 8)

We feel that Sierra is becoming a bit of a relic in comparison to more modern library systems. It doesn't behave in the way that's expected by our modern users, and we have a hard time integrating it with other systems and using it for electronic resources. It does have robust functionality, however, and is customizable to fit our local cataloging conventions. (Library type: Special; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 5)

Just implemented Vega 2 weeks ago. Lots of complaints, I think once the bugs are figured out people will like it just s much as Pika (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 8)

Sierra has some great features like Create Lists and Global update but the interface is very old. Encore does not have good electronic resources management and is not being developed any more. We will be migrating to Polaris/Vega (still through Innovative) with projected go live of June 2026. (Library type: Consortium; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 7)

We are overall pretty happy with our consortium manager, Marmot, which does a lot of the direct interaction with Innovative. That being said, it appears (and we've heard through the grape vine) that long-term Sierra is not a priority for Innovative, and that our consortium as a whole needs to seriously consider an ILS migration. There are somethings that work well in Sierra, and somethings that seem very dated and clunky. Our staff with a stronger software and/or database background can learn and teach themselves different functions to utilize more of Sierra's full capabilities. However, much of Sierra's interface and methods of accomplishing tasks are not intuitive, and are harder for less tech-savy staff to fully utilize and/or learn. The reality of library work is that our staff are often retires that did not need as much tech background in their previous careers, and young adults who have had most tech within their life time delivered as fairly intuitive and/or simplified apps. (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 7)

Very small staff here so thinking that OCLC will be what we end up going with. Do not have the tech staff to implement FOLIO but like its functionality. Have been pretty unhappy with Sierra for the last couple of years, more so now that they are no longer supporting Encore. (Library type: Special; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 2)

We are currently in the process of setting up the Vega Discovery layer on our system, so it is not currently in place. (Library type: Government Agency; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 8)

We have used Innovative systems for many years so it is difficult to provide an objective evaluation (no direct comparison available in our recent experience). We can say that Innovative's customer service and approach to fixing bugs and adding features in Sierra has improved markedly since it's most recent acquisition by Clarivate. (Library type: Law; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 7)

In regards to whether or not we would consider working with this company again, this response is more reflective of the fact that Clarivate is the primary company to offer other options for ILS, so we would need to consider working with them again if we wanted to explore migrating to a new automation system. (Library type: Public; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 8)

In regards to whether or not we would consider working with this company again, this response is more reflective of the fact that Clarivate is the primary company to offer other options for ILS, so we would need to consider working with them again if we wanted to explore migrating to a new automation system. (Library type: Public; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 8)

"Company" responses here indicate work directly with Innovative Interfaces and not the broader corporate structures above it (Ex Libris/ProQuest/Clarivate). In our new automation system considerations, we are looking at EBSCO as the potential host and service provider for FOLIO. Approximate number of items in the library's collection was calculated by taking a total search result of Book/eBook and Journal/eJournal titles in our discovery system and subtracting the number of open access results for the same content types. (Library type: Theology; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 6)

Related to the evaluation of the vendor of the ILS mentioned above we would like to clarify that it refers to our local intermediate vendor and not to the European company that sells the product. (Library type: Special; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 6)

Our support is getting better and better, but it had a long way to go from the many years in the wilderness of poor to zero support and responses. (Library type: Consortium; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 7)

After a relatively recent ILS review our current ILS system was selected and it highlighted the fact that all systems has benefits and drawbacks and no system was fully designed to meet all of our needs. While open source systems show promise, it requires a level of staffing dedication and expertise to contribute to the growth of the product that not all libraries or library systems have. (Library type: Public; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 6)

We have been very happy with the current development of Sierra by Innovative. Clarivate is continuing to plan for future update and enhancements of the product. They take customer input for enhancements and reported issues seriously and work quickly to resolve them. (Library type: Public; collection size: large; ils satisfaction: 8)

The cataloging module in Sierra is currently lacking. I am using WorldShare Collection Manager to download ebooks. After downloading, I edit the records using MarcEdit and then export them to Sierra. I am looking for a system that will minimize the workflow and make ebooks immediately available. (Library type: Academic; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 5)

We are in the process of migrating to Koha with Bywater Support. Go live is March 10th 2025 (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 2)

We have had this ILS for 20 years so our answers reflect a situation where we accept that how it does things is how it is and we adapt accordingly. We know that other systems likely manage resources more effectively but haven't explored these. (Library type: Public; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 7)

Estamos considerando Vega como nuestra herramienta de 'discovery (Library type: Public; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 6)

We finished an RFP and will be implementing Folio during the next 8 months. (Library type: ; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 6)

Cost is a major factor in our consideration of migrating to a different vendor (Library type: Public; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 8)

We recently completed an ILS exploration and decided to stay with Sierra largely because of the fantastic price we were offered by Innovative/Clarivate. We love the philosophy behind open source, but at the cost of the learning curve, we might struggle a little bit to manage open source. (Library type: Consortium; collection size: large; ils satisfaction: 8)

While we aren't happy with Innovative, and realize that Ex Libris is also under the same parent company, we are hopeful that the functionality of Alma will make it worthwhile to deal with that company. (Library type: Academic; collection size: large; ils satisfaction: 1)

We would only consider an open-source solution if financially pressured (Library type: Academic; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 9)

No ILS is perfect. We are generally happy with the product and the service we receive. We have no plans to consider other options given known limitations in other systems. (Library type: Public; collection size: large; ils satisfaction: 7)

We are in the process of migrating our ILS with the rest of OhioLINK to the Ex Libris LSP Alma/Primo. (Library type: Academic; collection size: large; ils satisfaction: 7)

We are currently in the process of migrating to Koha through Bywater Solutions. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 3)

The [...] runs an aging INN-Reach union catalog for resource sharing. An old Encore discovery layer is used. Some of the questions above don't exactly fit since we don't have a full ILS. INN-Reach is no longer being developed as a platform but will be replaced by Rapido with a Global Title Index in the cloud. Our focus is on migrating to OpenRS over the next couple of years. (Library type: Consortium; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 6)

Re, "Approximate number of items in the library's collection" -- unclear on definition of "collection" here. Estimate 400,000 as approximate number of owned physical materials and owned ebooks; excludes all journal holdings, most leased and PDA collections. (Library type: Academic; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 6)

We are already contracted to migrate to Alma/Primo. Our go-live with the new system will be late June 2025. (Library type: Academic; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 4)

We receive access to our ILS via a consortium, so any changes to the ILS or migration to another ILS hinge strongly on decisions of the consortial team. (Library type: Academic; collection size: large; ils satisfaction: 6)

Sierra needs to be updated and become WCAG 2.1 Compliant. This is one of the biggest issues we see with it. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 5)

Our library is currently migrating to Ex Libris Alma / Primo. We do not use Sierra to manage our Electronic resources so the 0 should be a N/A. (Library type: Academic; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 6)

---

Soutron

top

Number of items in collection - unknown, as collection is largely uncatalogued. ca.5K in database. Some concern over new (American) ownership of Soutron - support and all personal contacts remain excellent, but apparently no intention to resume user groups which were suspended at Covid and not much certainty about the direction of future developments. It all seems a bit arms-length as was not the case under previous owners who were UK-based and hands-on. Change is inevitable, I suppose, but I feel like a customer rather than a partner. (Library type: Archive - Special Collections; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 6)

---

Spydus

top

The product itself is great, but the quality of customer service has degraded significantly in recent years. It often takes a significant amount of time to get a response on tickets, and when responses are received, the information is lacking detail or requesting information that has already been provided. The online help articles are also lacking crucial information that would provide clarity for processes. (Library type: Public; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 8)

A new support system has been implemented which is much more user friendly than the former one. The vendor is very proactive in improving the system and takes onboard the customers' needs through an ideas portal. Many requests have been implemented in the last few years. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 8)

Spydus (Civica) is a perfectly decent library system, but the awful documentation and lack of support makes continuing with it unviable. It can be months before responses to simple questions are received, and the help files are not great. The listserv community is very helpful though, so that is a bonus. (Library type: Government Agency; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 5)

Contracts are due for renewal so it is time to test the market. (Library type: Public; collection size: large; ils satisfaction: 8)

We are part of a consortium who have recently had to meet with Civica due to the lack of support on some calls. Since the meeting, they have made efforts to make improvements but sadly they have taken on a lot of new customers without ensuring the required support is available. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 7)

Will likely go out to market in next 2 years are part of Local Government procurement rules. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 8)

---

Surpass

top

We've had good experiences with Surpass for many years. The move to a cloud-based service has some speed issues at times, but overall is still good. Their support is always prompt and pleasant, and they quickly solve the few issues we've had. (Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 8)

---

Symphony

top

Last year, SirsiDynix, without warning, discontinued their Library App ("BlueCloud Mobile") due to a dispute with a third-party vendor. They did this without warning, leaving patrons and libraries like ours stranded without a service that patrons had come to rely on for nearly eight months while they developed their own in-house replacement product. Their customer service response and corporate response to this breach of contract was abysmal. We no longer trust their reliability and so will be considering a replacement ILS sooner rather than later. This is in addition to the notoriously odd and sometimes difficult to navigate keyword searching that their discovery layer provides. It's just one issue too many for our patrons. (Library type: ; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 3)

Vendor slow to develop browser-based client with functionality equivalent to existing thick client. Vendor is developing their own library app but this currently lacks functionality equivalent to the app it previously re-sold. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 7)

[...]Library has been working with Sirsi since 2001. Since most of our resources are now digital, we are interested in a more integrated, online solution. However, we need to be sure that staff are ready for the change and can manage online resources effectively. (Library type: Academic; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 6)

Some of these questions should better be answered with 'Don't know' or "unsure" (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 7)

As a consortium, we are considering changing the ILS. But my library will have little to do with the process. (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 7)

At this point our ILS doesn't manage our primary electronic services, they are managed through the discovery side. I do not know if that is the same for other libraries in our consortium. We rarely, if ever, use the company's customer service as we use customer support through our state library consortium so applying a numerical score to that question is not applicable. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 7)

Despite the issues SirsiDynix has weathered the past couple of years, their product is reliable, and the customer service is stellar. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 8)

We are grateful for the responsive relationship we have had with our consortium office in the last 2-3 years, but the nationwide consortium model for SirsiDynix in New Zealand has some challenges - capacity of the consortium staff, the amount of service provision that can only be provided centrally (versus self-service), and investment in improving the product is slow. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 4)

We are concerned about Sirsi since it's acquisition by Harris. Staff members were laid off in a manner that worried us. We are hopeful that Harris will restore our faith, but it is too early to determine that. We are long term, very satisfied customers of Sirsi and don't want to see people sacrificed for profit. The people are who make the product a success. (Library type: Public; collection size: large; ils satisfaction: 9)

If I had filled out this survey even two weeks ago, there would have been absolutely no likelihood of considering another ILS, much less an open source solution. We're more fortunate than most other libraries in our state in regard to the stability of our funding--but things are changing in ways I didn't anticipate, and I fear how deeply we may be cut. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 8)

The vendor was acquired by a large general software company and promptly laid off 20% of its workforce. We have zero confidence in their ability to develop feature parity in the web interfaces compared to their Java client. They have been developing BLUEcloud since 2013 it still lacks many features which would enable us to use it in production, particularly with respect to cataloging. SirsiDynix has relied on customer inertia and locking libraries in to excessive multi year contracts to stay in business. They do not have a competitive offering compared to open source alternatives. Koha's capabilities with years of being a web interface will be far more useful for our purposes and we plan to migrate as soon as it is feasible to do so. (Library type: School; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 4)

SirsiDynix Symphony is a generally satisfactory and stable product, although its central core has not changed that much in 20 years. The Enterprise Discovery platform looks well and has some nice functionality, but is not well integrated into the the core system, Symphony, and its delivered settings were hugely unhelpful. It sounds like the company will not continue to develop it, but are considering a new discovery platform. Other weaknesses of the product are its rather antiquated and non-user-friendly reporting features. (Library type: Music; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 6)

Billing procedures for support and maintenance could be improved (Library type: Public; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 9)

We wish development was moving faster and fully usable deliverables available sooner. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 7)

We no longer have a systems librarian, so we could only use an open source system if we paid for it's hosting. We considered FOLIO, but Ebsco's hosting fees were considerable and it was easier to go with WMS, which seemed more feature complete. (Library type: Academic; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 2)

We use Symphony with the desktop version of workflows. We don't use any of the add-on BlueCloud products. Symphony lacks the functionality of a modern LMS. There is no Electronic Resource Management module and almost all collections/ acquisitions processes are manual with little to no automation, resulting in inefficient workflows for our staff. While it is a very reliable, stable system with very good customer support, it is now outdated and Sirsi's approach of building add-on modules on top of a system that is fundamentally built to manage print resources is unconvincing. As our library transitions more to electronic content, it seems inevitable that we will need to move to a system that has been designed with an integrated approach. Also, the cost of the system is equivalent to other more modern LMS's that don't require additional modules to achieve full functionality. (Library type: Law; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 4)

Sirsi/Dynix does not have a software platform to manage print services. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 9)

Thanks for this valuable survey, Regarding ILS , we seriously want to change for the better, as change is a key requirement to keep adaptation , As a new library in the region, we need to think well and thoughtfully before taking any step to right decision. We hope that we will succeed in this regard Appriciates ,,, (Library type: Public; collection size: large; ils satisfaction: 8)

While our ILS is Symphony and manages the print collection, the discovery layer is split between SirsiDynix Enterprise (print and hosted digital assets) and Ovid DS (online/electronic resources). I've directed responses accordingly. (Library type: Medical; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 7)

We have moved forward with increased partnership options that have helped us utilize the ILS better. This has been especially helpful during a time of decreased staff capacity due to bond building program and staffing, as well as organizational change implementation. (Library type: Public; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 7)

While our ILS is Symphony and manages the print collection, the discovery layer is split between SirsiDynix Enterprise (print and hosted digital assets) and Ovid DS (online/electronic resources). I've directed responses accordingly. (Library type: Medical; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 7)

Symphony is still meeting the needs of our library and users; however, there are integrated systems on the market that would make for a better-than-meets experience for our employees and users. Cost is a major barrier to migrating to a different product. (Library type: Medical; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 6)

We are currently not out to tender for a new LMS but have engaged in the first steps of looking. (Library type: Academic; collection size: large; ils satisfaction: 5)

We're tired of the expensive costs of adding any services to the ILS, lack of web functionality and problems with the bill every year so we're looking for a new ILS. We've seen a demo of Polaris by III and were not impressed with the demo team nor the Clarivate executive who sat in on the demo. We also saw a demo of Koha hosted by ByWater Solutions. I was dead set against open source since we don't employ any programmers or developers. Now that I've seen Koha and how inexpensive it is and the fact that ByWater doesn't charge for any SIP2 or API/Web services connections, my mind was blown. We've been paying far too much for far too long! (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 3)

There's a lot of talk with numerous seminars on what SD are working on, but the busy hive of production doesn't seem to be making any honey. Symphony itself is fine, if not very dated in appearance. It is both easy enough to use for those just needing a surface interaction, and complex enough if you need to jump in deep. I suspect that the new BlueCloud products will look nice, but lack deeper functionality for advanced problem solving. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 7)

While I have only had to use Symphony for a year, it's clear from researching the problems I've run into that I am not alone in my troubles with SirsiDynix. It's certainly a ~usable~ system, and we get by using it just fine, but there are so very many areas that can be improved that have caused friction for my library. As I have seen plenty others mention, the lack of 21st century innovation and the slow updates and progression with their BLUEcloud services leaves me wanting more. I am not well versed enough in other ILS options to know whether our prospects would be better elsewhere, all I can say is that I'm not 100% satisfied with the results we get from Symphony. All this being said, the support staff is always incredibly helpful and does their best to give us a solution for anything we run into. (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 5)

Our I.T. department does not currently support an open source option. (Library type: Academic; collection size: medium)

[...] (Library type: Theology; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 8)

For managing electronic resources, the score is lower due to not using the eRM software. (Library type: Theology; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 8)

We have about 4 more years to decide whether to move to open source or not. This is not just about functionality issues but budgetary issues as well. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 7)

SirsiDynix products are very good and the support staff are even better. Any queries or requests for assistance are answered quickly, by knowledgeable staff. (Library type: Academic; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 7)

[...] (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 7)

I do not feel that [...] , our consortium, considers libraries at all. As the library representatives have retired or moved on, they have farmed out our services to [...] , and they mostly only care about [...] services, not library-related problems. They try, but I don't feel that anyone at [...] has much experience with our programs, and it is just easier to say "That's just the way the program is" or "Here is a workaround" than to try to get Sirsi (the vendor) to fix the issue at hand. I also feel that the public libraries receive more consideration than the school libraries. In the past, when I asked why something that seemed silly was the way it was, I was always told that it was how the public libraries wanted it, such as a book still showing available even though it is a lost-claim. Who cares? There should be different criteria for the public and school libraries. I don't feel like it is a lack of trying by the representatives at [...] . I just feel like maybe they were thrown into working with these programs, and they don't know what to do with them and don't understand what we mean when we come to them with problems. (Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 5)

I have been very impressed with our switch to Workflows on the Web this year. We have had wonderful support when anything come up. (Library type: School; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 9)

We have been very satisfied in this service over the many years that we have been using it. The staff is knowledgeable and always friendly and helpful. The program is also easy for staff to use. (Library type: Public; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 8)

I am very happy with the ILS that we have now and when there is an issue, it seems to be taken care of in a very timely manner. (Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)

We are very happy to continue using Symphony and SirsiDynix. Being part of a consortium, we would not make any changes to our Discovery Interface, ILS Vendor or Automation System without consultation and agreement with the other library consortium members. (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)

We are going to migrate to Alma and Primo in July 2025. (Library type: Academic; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 2)

Due to Government procurement governance, the library is required to revisit the market and determine which ILS is best value for money with improved functionality. (Library type: Government Agency; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 8)

We are only with SirsiDynix because as part of a Consortium, we are bound by the decisions the group makes. That being said, no other product on the market is so much better than Sirsi that we would leave. We've already chosen a different discovery interface and app because the Sirsi products are truly terrible. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 7)

SirsiDynix is still developing software like it's the early 2000s. If current software in general is "nimble," SD clocks in at "lumbering." (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 5)

I left the question about electronic resources blank because we really don't use our ILS for most of our electronic resources. We have our Overdrive titles display in the OPAC, but otherwise use other, non-ILS, methods of accessing our electronic resources. (Library type: Consortium; collection size: large; ils satisfaction: 8)

We are currently conducting an LMS Procurement with a direct approach to SirsiDynix. Their BC Acquisitions product fulfils our unique requirements. Overall, we have been very impressed with the company and how they conduct themselves. We have had consistently good service and response from support, and the product developers actively engage to develop enhancements to the product. Our library relations manager over the years has been exceptional - very responsive and diligent in following up on requests for information and escalating issues. (Library type: Consortium; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 8)

Sirsi Dynix is unintuitive, difficult and unhelpful. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 2)

Under contract with SirsiDynix until 12/31/2028 (Library type: Consortium; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 7)

Symphony is definitely showing her age. While it may have been best in class 20 years ago; Now? It simply hasn't kept up with innovation that other ILSs have implemented. It is sorely lacking a web based client that is fully functional and while the company has promised us BlueCloud it has been over a decade since that was first announced. Customer support is still top notch but good customer support can only go so far and it certainly doesn't make up in the fact it is hard to navigate, has old architecture, and a very dated interface. The final cherry on top is the constant nickel and diming every time we want to make some minor changes or request a new report. (Library type: Public; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 0)

While SirsiDynix has enabled us to integrate with OCLC Connexion, OpenAthens and EBSCO which are vital to our daily workflow, it has not delivered a discovery lathat which enables users to discover and access all our materials in an intuitive and user-friendly way. (Library type: Theology; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 6)

Our system does not interface well with BlueCloud Acquisitions and the information is very inaccurate (Library type: Public; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 8)

By choosing open source, we must use our institution's IT department which does not have enough staff to provide the support we would need. (Library type: Academic; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 9)

SirsiDynix support has been very good and responsive including working with their product managers, and premier services. They have communicated their roadmap and kept us informed. (Library type: Public; collection size: large; ils satisfaction: 8)

happy with our consortium making choices and supporting issues, too small a service to manage this in house. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 7)

We are considering migrating to FOLIO by EBSCO. We need the system to be hosted, and we do not have the resources to self host. (Library type: Law; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 5)

We are increasingly coming up against issues required to keep our system in line with staff and customer expectations but finding our system; can't do it, is overly complex or these changes require additional funds. The staff at SirsiDynix are experienced and very helpful but the company overall is dragged down by having development happening on too many fronts resulting in little that is relevant to us as a single site public library. When I look at the new features the are tailored to consortia, like the increasing integration of IMMS, or academic libraries, with the strong focus on the OA products. There has been an increased investment of capital and staff into finally getting the BlueCloud suite of products market ready but after 7 years of broken promises and a lack luster Circulation module I am more inclined to view these as vaporware rather than a realistic plan. For a library like hours which likes to embrace innovations it is increasingly looking like our best course is to try a different LMS vendor and watch the SirisDynix development from afar. (Library type: Public; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 6)

We have chosen OCLC's WorldShare Management for our new LSP going live in spring 2025. (Library type: Academic; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 2)

---

TIND IR

top

We migrated from Tind to Lucidea in 2020-21. (Library type: Special; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 7)

---

TinyCat

top

[...] (Library type: Public; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 7)

---

VERSO

top

Auto-Graphics worked with us to customize the product to the varied policies each of our libraries have and still be able to work together. (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 8)

We are happy with Auto-Graphics but wish there was a working feature that allowed patrons to put printed materials on reserve via online. Unfortunately, everything looks as though it works but, when they come in, we haven't received any holds' notices. Also, we used to be able to search a book title via "Item Status" but now it's hit or miss. I don't know if this has anything to do with recent changes to the system or not, but it's frustrating. Otherwise, it's an easy platform to navigate. (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 7)

In the past, I would have said that I was happy with the customer service for Auto-Graphics. In the last 6 months to a year, most of the issues I've run into, they can't fix or they have caused. I'm not thrilled when the response I receive is "we aren't planning on fixing that problem at this time." (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 6)

Recently a change must have been made and I can no longer see a way to modify the message that prints on our patron check-out receipts. It has outdated information and seriously needs to be changed. I realize that improvements are being made and try to stay up to date on what they are and how to navigate, but as of now, this is a critical aspect I need to access but isn't available. It would also be great if we could copy a MARC record from an off-site avenue, like Library of Congress, and paste it into a blank New Bib. I do appreciate the changes on how items are added to bib records, and the quick response to correcting the issues brought up with the first release of that update. Also, I am liking the direction that the new reports are taking, like having a description pop-up when hovering over report title, and having graphs to visualize the data. I am looking forward to more customizable options on the new reports platform when reports are being generated, like being able to change the colors in the graphs (yellow is really hard to see on presentations), or choosing the date range in Active Users and New Users. (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 7)

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

They have made 'updates' to their system in the last year that have caused issues with us being able to do some of our functions properly, and the system seems to be running slower. If the consortium chooses to move to a different ILS, we would make the change. (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 5)

It seems that we are constantly having issue after issue with VERSO. When we originally began with VERSO we weren't informed properly about certain things. When contacting customer service we don't always get a satisfactory answer. At times, I received an answer: "Oh, thank you for bringing that to my attention." (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 0)

We have had several issues with VERSO that have never been resolved by their tech support. We will not be renewing our contract and are switching to Apollo this month. One of the most frustrating parts of working with VERSO was that their tech support ticket system automatically closes open tickets after a set period of time even if the issue has not been resolved. Some issues that we have had: Text Messaging functionality, blocked/expired patron accounts that are still able to reserve and/or renew items but should be blocked from placing holds, tech support was not responsive to this request, system updates rarely went smoothly, many times an update to fix one thing ended up breaking something else. They recently decided to change the way to add/edit/delete items from the catalog and actually made it more complicated and less functional. I do not think they understand how a library needs to use their catalog system and those considerations were not built into their functionality design. (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 1)

Our current ILS has issues that effect some but not all patrons. I have reached out to get this addressed and have been told there is nothing on their end that is wrong. Also, updates are pushed through without notification of what they are and many of the updates change the day-to-day workings of the system. This requires my staff to relearn the system on a regular basis. Also, changes to catalog records in the system also will randomly revert back to the old records. (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 3)

[...] (Library type: Public; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 6)

It is unlikely that we will consider an Open-Source ILS system as our library does not have the staff to provide technical support. While AutoGraphics is a very customer-oriented ILS company and provides great customer support, its ILS is intended for public libraries. While it has basic functions needed, if we were to migrate to a new ILS system we would look for one geared toward academic libraries. (Library type: Academic; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 7)

The customer service and support for Verso by Autographics is excellent. Any issue I have brought to their attention has been addressed in a timely manner. The system went thorough a big update in 2024 and the roll out was problematic, but issues are being addressed and remedied. The system has an excellent price point for a small library or collection, but it is not very robust. (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 4)

Our regional system recently made a switch to an open source (KoHa) and our library choose to not make the change. We stayed with VERSO and are very happy. Since our support dropped considerably, we can say that VERSO stepped up and has made us appreciate our choice to stay. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 8)

It works well for a library of our size, and the help desk is very helpful (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 8)

Current ILS recently did an upgrade that took away some functionality. Given the number of libraries expressing displeasure, they are adjusting the software to bring back those features. (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 8)

Since the transition to AG version 6, this ILS is riddled with problems and constantly in need of fixes. Our library staff longs for the good ole days when it functioned as needed. (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 2)

My criticism of Verso is that the user is unable to do batch changes of authority records when needed. I've never understood why there isn't some portal that allows us entrance to modify name, title, and subject authorities. (Library type: Library Personnel; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 8)

For the most part, Verso adequately runs our library system. It is sometimes difficult to find where things are - and getting reports to provide the data needed. It could use a simpler interface, but overall, Verso gets the job done. (Library type: Public; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 7)

Wonderful job! (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 6)

---

Virtua

top

We will be transitioning to Koha (with Bywater support) in 2025. (Library type: ; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 6)

---

Voyager

top

We are currently working to migrate to OCLC WMS. We have had a complete turnover in staff and voyager is not friendly to new users and the support was severely lacking. (Library type: ; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 1)

If we do go with open source it would be with a support vendor such as Bywater or Equinox (Library type: Independent Research; collection size: large; ils satisfaction: 8)

Currently in RFP stage with plans to migrate in 2026. (Library type: Academic; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 5)

We are in currently in the process of migrating from Voyager to Folio. Our consortium will no longer be supporting Voyager, so we are required to migrate and our consortial partners selected Folio. We will be using VuFind as a search layer. (Library type: Academic; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 6)

---

WorldShare Management Services

top

OCLC's price growth is unsustainable, and the fact that they own the union catalog so we can't get away from them if we want to participate in ILL is increasingly frustrating. WMS and Discovery are wonderful and mature tools, but the price is getting out of hand. (Library type: Academic; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 8)

OCLC's price growth is unsustainable, and the fact that they own the union catalog so we can't get away from them if we want to participate in ILL is increasingly frustrating. WMS and Discovery are wonderful and mature tools, but the price is getting out of hand. (Library type: Academic; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 8)

[...] (Library type: Academic; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 8)

OCLC=Too expensive (Library type: Academic; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 8)

We are actively in the midst of migrating from OCLC to ExLibris as part of a move in joining a consortium in the past 6 months. We are excited about the transition and many efficiencies it will provide. (Library type: Academic; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 5)

As a small academic library, we are very cost conscious as are our PALNI colleagues. We need to find a library management system that not only works for us but is also affordable. We can't afford to spend most of our budget on a library management system. We have other needs. (Library type: Academic; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 6)

The library is part of a consortium. The answers reflect our opinions if we were choosing systems independently, but the decision of our consortium has been different. (Library type: Academic; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 7)

As we are just in the process of migrating to WMS so are not really able to comment on its capabilities or functionality in relation to our services and customers (Library type: Academic; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 5)

We (2 librarians) considered migrating to a new ILS in 2023. We decided against an open source ILS in favor of a system that we perceived to have more technical & customer support for our very small library--we do not have enough in-house expertise to deal with IT issues. We migrated to WMS (from Ex Libris Voyager) in 2024. (Library type: Theology; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 7)

We would consider it but we are not currently looking. (Library type: Academic; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 6)

We are in the middle of migrating to Alma and Primo VE because of our dissatisfaction with WMS. It is particularly problematic for electronic resource management. (Library type: Academic; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 3)

In general WMS works fine for us. We are able to conduct our library processes without great hinder. However sometimes there are small and sometimes strange issues we com across when using the system. Sometimes these issues solve themselves or we ask the support desk for help. Sometimes the sharing of updates or news can be a bit more nuanced and timely. (Library type: Academic; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 7)

We would have scored a little higher, but the reporting functions in WMS needs a complete update. (Library type: Academic; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 7)

Our library is a supported institution[...] is actively investigating open-source options. (Library type: Theology; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 8)

We're part of a multi-library consortium which shares an ILS, so decisions about the ILS are made at the consortium level. (Library type: Academic; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 8)

[...] In regard to additional comments for the products and vendors mentioned, we are very satisfied with how things are going so far. Worldshare has made many aspects of our jobs easier including, ILL and cataloguing. (Library type: Special; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 9)

---

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