Library Technology Guides

---

Statistical Report for Koha -- Bywater

Statistics according to type and size categories

The following table presents the 2024 results according to the type and size of the library.

1 Responses for Koha -- Bywater in 2009

0 Responses for Koha -- Bywater in 2008

0 Responses for Koha -- Bywater in 2007

2024 : gen: 7.67 company 7.90 loyalty 7.85 support 7.87

2023 : gen: 7.70 company 8.00 loyalty 8.01 support 7.89

2022 : gen: 7.92 company 8.22 loyalty 8.02 support 8.20

2021 : gen: 7.94 company 8.18 loyalty 8.04 support 8.14

2020 : gen: 7.84 company 8.10 loyalty 8.13 support 8.26

2019 : gen: 7.87 company 8.28 loyalty 7.89 support 8.27

2018 : gen: 7.77 company 8.06 loyalty 7.92 support 8.09

2017 : gen: 7.75 company 7.94 loyalty 7.41 support 7.93

2016 : gen: 7.74 company 7.94 loyalty 7.78 support 7.90

2015 : gen: 7.43 company 7.62 loyalty 7.34 support 7.70

2014 : gen: 7.34 company 7.61 loyalty 7.26 support 7.63

2013 : gen: 7.61 company 7.83 loyalty 7.48 support 7.84

2012 : gen: 7.78 company 8.11 loyalty 8.02 support 8.05

2011 : gen: 7.61 company 8.07 loyalty 7.98 support 8.17

2010 : gen: 7.86 company 8.41 loyalty 8.73 support 8.44

Comments (survey2024)

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

Koha is open source (Library type: ; 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: ; 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: ; collection size: very large; 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)

---

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