Library Technology Guides

Documents, Databases, News, and Commentary

Select another Product Report:

Statistical Report for ALEPH 500


2017 Survey Results
Product: ALEPH 500 Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction105 2 3 3 4 9 17 17 35 14 1 75.816
ILS Functionality105 2 2 6 5 18 15 19 21 13 4 75.506
Print Functionality103 1 1 3 5 7 8 29 35 14 87.027
Electronic Functionality102 10 11 19 12 7 20 8 12 3 53.623
Company Satisfaction103 3 2 2 3 7 10 16 36 19 5 76.197
Support Satisfaction101 2 1 6 5 8 13 10 31 17 8 76.047
Support Improvement101 3 2 3 3 18 40 12 12 5 3 55.075
Company Loyalty101 4 3 5 3 2 11 8 22 18 25 96.507
Open Source Interest100 35 11 5 9 12 9 8 4 3 4 02.772

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS105 6864.76%
Considering new Interface105 1615.24%
System Installed on time?105 8379.05%

Average Collection size: 1368274

TypeCount
Public3
Academic54
School0
Consortia0
Special2

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,0003
[2] 10,001-100,00020
[3] 100,001-250,00020
[4] 250,001-1,000,00026
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,00027
[6] over 10,000,0012



2016 Survey Results
Product: ALEPH 500 Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction129 1 1 5 10 8 15 35 31 15 8 65.956
ILS Functionality129 1 8 12 13 11 27 32 16 9 75.856
Print Functionality128 2 4 4 5 6 17 27 39 24 86.967
Electronic Functionality126 10 15 21 16 12 21 15 9 6 1 23.714
Company Satisfaction128 1 7 6 9 15 19 37 24 10 76.247
Support Satisfaction127 2 3 4 3 10 16 22 32 23 12 76.207
Support Improvement127 1 3 4 21 51 17 7 16 7 55.505
Company Loyalty127 4 4 3 5 10 14 15 16 23 33 96.447
Open Source Interest128 40 12 18 13 15 7 8 2 5 8 02.782

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS130 8464.62%
Considering new Interface130 1511.54%
System Installed on time?130 11084.62%

Average Collection size: 1481089

TypeCount
Public9
Academic95
School1
Consortia0
Special5

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,0004
[2] 10,001-100,00029
[3] 100,001-250,00013
[4] 250,001-1,000,00041
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,00032
[6] over 10,000,0014



2015 Survey Results
Product: ALEPH 500 Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction110 1 3 5 4 11 14 23 26 21 2 75.866
ILS Functionality110 4 7 3 6 17 30 25 15 3 65.806
Print Functionality110 1 1 2 5 1 11 14 22 39 14 86.867
Electronic Functionality107 12 12 11 12 17 15 10 10 7 1 43.814
Company Satisfaction108 2 4 7 7 12 19 30 21 6 76.167
Support Satisfaction109 1 2 5 6 7 14 20 24 23 7 76.086
Support Improvement105 2 4 4 15 35 16 12 11 6 55.515
Company Loyalty106 4 5 4 8 15 11 20 19 20 76.297
Open Source Interest109 29 17 14 6 11 13 7 5 4 3 02.832

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS114 6355.26%
Considering new Interface114 1311.40%
System Installed on time?114 9885.96%

Average Collection size: 2504333

TypeCount
Public7
Academic85
School0
Consortia0
Special4

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,0003
[2] 10,001-100,00021
[3] 100,001-250,00022
[4] 250,001-1,000,00026
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,00030
[6] over 10,000,0015



2014 Survey Results
Product: ALEPH 500 Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction139 8 6 9 11 22 50 21 12 76.357
ILS Functionality139 8 5 9 9 30 37 25 16 76.447
Print Functionality137 7 3 12 38 52 25 87.468
Electronic Functionality137 6 5 10 11 19 32 24 16 7 7 54.885
Company Satisfaction138 3 8 5 6 17 20 32 31 16 76.377
Support Satisfaction138 2 4 6 3 11 14 15 38 27 18 76.337
Support Improvement135 2 2 1 4 21 48 16 14 9 18 55.695
Company Loyalty138 6 4 4 6 10 9 17 32 19 31 76.327
Open Source Interest136 33 25 20 4 11 16 9 14 2 2 02.852

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS140 6445.71%
Considering new Interface140 1812.86%
System Installed on time?140 11783.57%

Average Collection size: 1305573

TypeCount
Public15
Academic103
School0
Consortia0
Special5

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,0006
[2] 10,001-100,00021
[3] 100,001-250,00028
[4] 250,001-1,000,00039
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,00034
[6] over 10,000,0013



2013 Survey Results
Product: ALEPH 500 Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction96 1 3 2 5 5 10 12 36 16 6 76.237
ILS Functionality96 3 4 1 5 11 12 31 24 5 76.417
Print Functionality96 2 1 2 1 5 6 24 44 11 87.238
Electronic Functionality96 4 11 9 8 14 15 14 16 4 1 74.395
Company Satisfaction96 1 3 6 3 6 7 17 24 24 5 76.157
Support Satisfaction96 1 4 3 3 10 9 15 19 24 8 86.167
Support Improvement94 1 3 4 6 7 39 10 10 8 6 55.325
Company Loyalty96 7 2 5 1 8 6 10 21 16 20 76.177
Open Source Interest94 22 12 15 9 6 11 4 7 4 4 03.072

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS99 4040.40%
Considering new Interface99 2121.21%
System Installed on time?99 8484.85%

Average Collection size: 1419886

TypeCount
Public2
Academic68
School0
Consortia0
Special5

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,0005
[2] 10,001-100,00015
[3] 100,001-250,00013
[4] 250,001-1,000,00033
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,00018
[6] over 10,000,0013



2012 Survey Results
Product: ALEPH 500 Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction130 1 3 6 7 12 25 48 23 5 76.367
ILS Functionality130 1 5 2 8 12 24 42 30 6 76.467
Print Functionality0 00.00
Electronic Functionality0 00.00
Company Satisfaction130 1 1 4 8 11 15 22 37 26 5 76.127
Support Satisfaction129 1 2 7 13 7 14 23 33 23 6 75.896
Support Improvement126 2 2 4 5 17 40 17 16 18 5 55.525
Company Loyalty129 7 5 3 3 5 18 16 26 28 18 86.167
Open Source Interest128 34 16 13 12 6 15 13 10 7 2 03.123

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS133 4634.59%
Considering new Interface133 3627.07%
System Installed on time?133 10679.70%

Average Collection size: 10677748

TypeCount
Public5
Academic92
School1
Consortia0
Special7

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,0008
[2] 10,001-100,00012
[3] 100,001-250,00019
[4] 250,001-1,000,00033
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,00036
[6] over 10,000,0013



2011 Survey Results
Product: ALEPH 500 Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction139 1 2 3 7 12 11 22 47 27 7 76.277
ILS Functionality135 3 8 9 10 9 15 41 31 9 76.207
Print Functionality0 00.00
Electronic Functionality0 00.00
Company Satisfaction139 2 2 7 8 12 12 24 38 21 13 76.067
Support Satisfaction138 3 1 7 7 10 16 20 40 22 12 76.097
Support Improvement139 2 2 4 7 16 51 14 13 15 15 55.615
Company Loyalty137 9 10 3 5 6 24 10 21 30 19 85.797
Open Source Interest139 32 14 20 7 13 20 16 6 3 8 03.323

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS140 3625.71%
Considering new Interface140 4532.14%
System Installed on time?140 10877.14%

Average Collection size: 1515109

TypeCount
Public8
Academic102
School1
Consortia0
Special6

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,0006
[2] 10,001-100,00023
[3] 100,001-250,00019
[4] 250,001-1,000,00034
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,00034
[6] over 10,000,0014



2010 Survey Results
Product: ALEPH 500 Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction105 1 1 7 3 12 18 39 20 4 76.417
ILS Functionality0 00.00
Print Functionality0 00.00
Electronic Functionality0 00.00
Company Satisfaction104 1 4 6 10 18 14 31 16 4 75.976
Support Satisfaction104 2 7 5 7 14 21 20 25 3 85.966
Support Improvement103 6 1 3 14 43 12 6 9 9 55.335
Company Loyalty103 6 4 5 6 17 9 22 15 19 75.987
Open Source Interest103 16 18 10 10 10 17 8 6 5 3 13.403

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS106 2018.87%
Considering new Interface106 6359.43%
System Installed on time?106 8983.96%

Average Collection size: 1854711

TypeCount
Public4
Academic76
School0
Consortia0
Special3

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,0001
[2] 10,001-100,00016
[3] 100,001-250,00013
[4] 250,001-1,000,00025
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,00029
[6] over 10,000,0012



2009 Survey Results
Product: ALEPH 500 Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction133 2 2 1 7 7 16 26 37 31 4 76.267
ILS Functionality0 00.00
Print Functionality0 00.00
Electronic Functionality0 00.00
Company Satisfaction131 4 1 5 4 11 20 20 35 25 6 76.007
Support Satisfaction132 4 2 5 4 12 24 27 23 20 11 65.866
Support Improvement123 3 1 2 3 14 43 19 16 11 11 55.675
Company Loyalty132 11 5 5 6 7 11 13 26 31 17 85.897
Open Source Interest131 30 10 11 12 12 15 16 15 3 7 03.664

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS135 1611.85%
Considering new Interface135 6145.19%
System Installed on time?135 10577.78%





2008 Survey Results
Product: ALEPH 500 Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction66 2 1 1 6 5 8 12 20 9 2 75.806
ILS Functionality0 00.00
Print Functionality0 00.00
Electronic Functionality0 00.00
Company Satisfaction66 2 2 7 5 7 7 16 10 7 3 65.206
Support Satisfaction66 2 1 6 11 4 13 8 13 5 3 55.055
Support Improvement0 not applicable
Company Loyalty66 6 3 3 7 7 9 8 8 8 7 55.065
Open Source Interest66 9 6 8 3 6 14 5 9 1 5 54.115

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS66 812.12%
Considering new Interface66 3756.06%
System Installed on time?66 5278.79%





2007 Survey Results
Product: ALEPH 500 Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction78 4 2 4 2 4 9 15 28 9 1 75.696
ILS Functionality0 00.00
Print Functionality0 00.00
Electronic Functionality0 00.00
Company Satisfaction87 5 2 7 5 10 14 12 22 8 2 75.166
Support Satisfaction86 5 4 8 4 16 10 13 16 6 4 44.885
Support Improvement0 not applicable
Company Loyalty85 11 6 3 6 8 20 6 11 6 8 54.655
Open Source Interest87 17 8 11 4 13 13 4 9 3 5 03.624

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS88 89.09%
Considering new Interface88 3438.64%
System Installed on time?88 11.14%




2017 : gen: 5.81 company 6.19 loyalty 6.50 support 6.04

2016 : gen: 5.95 company 6.24 loyalty 6.44 support 6.20

2015 : gen: 5.86 company 6.16 loyalty 6.29 support 6.08

2014 : gen: 6.35 company 6.37 loyalty 6.32 support 6.33

2013 : gen: 6.23 company 6.15 loyalty 6.17 support 6.16

2012 : gen: 6.36 company 6.12 loyalty 6.16 support 5.89

2011 : gen: 6.27 company 6.06 loyalty 5.79 support 6.09

2010 : gen: 6.41 company 5.97 loyalty 5.98 support 5.96

2009 : gen: 6.26 company 6.00 loyalty 5.89 support 5.86

2008 : gen: 5.80 company 5.20 loyalty 5.06 support 5.05

2007 : gen: 5.69 company 5.16 loyalty 4.65 support 4.88

Comments

Project to implement Alma and Primo is imminent. Plan to migrate in the next 5 months (Type: Academic)

Library systems are increasingly dis-integrated and poorly connected--from library cataloging to integrated discovery tools to institutional repositories to learning management systems and publishing platforms. No vendor presents a holistic view with APIs to facilitate integration. (Type: Academic)

Sorry but we didn't understand this question: For the most recent ILS implemented in this library, was the system installed and put into production on schedule according to the terms of your contract? (Type: Academic)

Very flexible for configure services, we are a multilibrary system with different loan schemes. (Type: Academic)

How effective is this product in managing your library's electronic resources? - This is of course mainly done with SFX. Overall pretty satisfied with Ex Libris and their products. Exception being Verde, which is horrible. (Type: Academic)

Prices policy of vendor is not clear. Hiden additional costs arise when upgrading and/or migrating or when new functionalities added as "extras", not included in standard package. (Type: Special)

for number of items : we count all items in ILS (Type: Academic)

Number of items in collection this year includes digital records for ebooks, streaming videos, etc. in addition to the print resources. We are ready for a next-gen ILS and are fortunate that [...] provides the technical support we need. Ex Libris is not responsive to our individual needs; a system with more open source features allows [...] to customize for [...] libraries. (Type: Academic)

We're in the process of looking at discovery interfaces and possibly an ILS. There's not a lot of choice because we don't have the resources to run a local system anymore, so everything has to be cloud based. (Type: Academic)

As part of the [...] system, we negotiate as a group, so we have little say in our ILS and the ILS vendor. The benefits of being part of a consortium where we do not have to host our own server or make system upgrades or back up our own data outweigh the negative aspect of not being able to make an ILS change on our own. The Aleph system is outdated and clunky and difficult to program, but it's what we've got. (Type: Academic)

We are generally happy with Ex Libris, and hope that new US leadership will improve issues with support as experience over the past year. (Type: Academic)

We are currently testing our SFX instance which will be launched to the public at the same time we launch Primo. Really too early to answer some questions about the experience. (Type: Medical)

We are in the process of migrating to OCLC WMS, so responses are colored by that decision. Go live on Nov. 17. (Type: Academic)

Ex-Libris could do much to improve the level of service that they provide to their customers. (Type: Medical)

Although our library is not wild about the service from Ex Libris, we are part of a consortium and must use the system the consortium selects, which might be another Ex Libris product. (Type: Academic)

Our cooperation with Aleph Polska (Polish vendor for ExLibris' Products) works well. (Type: Academic)

The ILS Aleph500 is sufficient for our small print stock. It is a very traditional oriented software. The administration of all electronic resources is unsufficient. But the work with an Cloud-Service is not the solution for us, because there are problems with the data safety for libraries in research institutes. (Type: Academic)

We have been running Aleph since 2001. Our answers are based on the overall experience of the past 13 years. Our experience with our vendor is that they agree to everything you request at the time of sale but in the end they don't deliver. The support staff is great but the company's customer support services needs improvement. If the software doesn't have a service that we need there is very little that the support staff can do other than suggest workarounds. (Type: Academic)

in our case the developer has no office in the country, only a representative company with a small team, which sometimes makes it difficult to give us support and training. (Type: Academic)

[...] (Type: Academic)

[...] will "go live" on Alma [...]. Because we are still in migration, I filled out this survey with responses directed toward our current Aleph ILS system in production. In addition, we already have Primo implemented and will continue using Primo subsequent to the Alma go-live date. (Type: Academic)

The consortia is made up of [...] campuses. Of these, [...] use the Ex Libris Aleph product. The central office supports [...] campuses in a hosted environment. In 2015 the central office will be conducting a broader review of system-wide services, and the evaluation of an Aleph replacement will be within the context of that review. Challenges: the range of institutions within our consortia have significantly different missions and budgets; how to meet very different needs across the consortia given that a one size solution has been problematic (not necessarily the fault of the software); there are few next-gen enterprise level systems available and they are still in development. The challenges go beyond considerations about particular vendors and product features. Further, education about the differences in design and scope of the developing systems - Alma, WMS, Intota, etc. needs to be conducted across the consortia to help identify how these systems can support institutional goals. My guestimate for seriously evaluating and selecting new system(s) will be in the 2016/2017 time frame. (Type: Academic)

Our library has been with this same product and consortium for a good number of years and are pleased with the vendor and those individuals who help us with any problems that might occur. (Type: Academic)

Our consortium is considering Kuali Ole as a possible library service platform. This would be a serious mistake for our library, as well as other smaller libraries in the consortium, who has one technology librarian. Since we have implemented WCL as a discovery layer, many here would prefer leaving Ex Libris and going totally with OCLC. (Type: Academic)

We do not deal directly with the ILS company and its customer service but through [...]. Also, the current system was implemented many years ago so we don't know if it was put into production as expected. (Type: Academic)

All libraries in our current system (28) use the same ILS w/ Primo discovery service, so we have little interaction with the actual company itself. Mostly our support. implementation, and new products/service come directly from the consortium responsible for all of us. We have little say in changes or updates, unfortunately. (Type: Academic)

As a part of the Icelandic consortium of libraries (ICL), this libary does not make any purchases or discovery tools on its own. The answers are reflecting the status for ICL to the best of my knowledge. (Type: Academic)

We are plugging along with Aleph with the rest of [...]. [...] has been a great help with questions/issues. (Type: Academic)

The systems are under development through our consortium UNILINC. We are moving from ALEPH, DIGITOOL, SFX to an integrated ALMA. (Type: Museum)

Main reasons for high score under 'consider working with this company again' are 1) the difficulty of changing system when we have so many products with Ex Libris, though this has changed with our dropping of Primo; and 2) the lack of a fully effective alternative system in the market. We are keeping a watch on Alma, but we do not see it yet as fit for purpose. (Type: Academic)

Mas informacion sobre SIGB en codigo abierto (Type: Public)

Considero importante que el bilbiotecario tenga acceso a los reportes, ya sea de los usuarios existentes, de los libros actualizados y tambien, considerar en el programa que se otorge un reporte de los libros pendientes o en su caso, de los usuarios con prestamos pendientes (Type: Public)

Falla el sistema en algunas oportunidades, no se puede imprimir el listado de libros de las cajas viajeras (Type: Public)

ILS