Library Technology Guides

Documents, Databases, News, and Commentary

Select another Product Report:

Statistical Report for Spydus


2017 Survey Results
Product: Spydus Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction34 1 1 6 15 10 1 77.007
ILS Functionality33 2 1 11 10 9 66.707
Print Functionality34 1 1 3 14 13 2 77.267
Electronic Functionality34 1 3 2 9 4 9 6 55.856
Company Satisfaction34 1 1 4 6 11 9 2 76.657
Support Satisfaction34 1 1 1 4 11 7 7 2 66.356
Support Improvement34 2 3 1 3 9 10 2 4 76.066
Company Loyalty33 1 2 2 6 10 4 8 76.917
Open Source Interest34 13 5 4 2 3 1 3 1 2 02.261

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS34 25.88%
Considering new Interface34 514.71%
System Installed on time?34 3294.12%

Average Collection size: 210246

TypeCount
Public28
Academic2
School1
Consortia0
Special1

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,0001
[2] 10,001-100,00012
[3] 100,001-250,0009
[4] 250,001-1,000,0009
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,0001
[6] over 10,000,0010



2016 Survey Results
Product: Spydus Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction45 1 1 2 2 8 16 11 4 76.737
ILS Functionality45 1 1 2 3 5 14 14 5 76.937
Print Functionality43 1 1 1 4 6 8 15 7 86.958
Electronic Functionality45 2 5 3 4 8 10 7 5 1 65.186
Company Satisfaction45 1 1 2 2 4 5 13 12 5 76.607
Support Satisfaction44 1 1 3 1 4 4 18 9 3 76.457
Support Improvement45 1 2 7 12 11 5 5 2 55.606
Company Loyalty43 1 1 2 1 2 5 6 13 12 87.128
Open Source Interest44 18 6 9 3 4 2 1 1 01.731

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS45 36.67%
Considering new Interface45 36.67%
System Installed on time?45 4293.33%

Average Collection size: 203571

TypeCount
Public37
Academic4
School0
Consortia0
Special1

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,0000
[2] 10,001-100,00015
[3] 100,001-250,00014
[4] 250,001-1,000,00013
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,0001
[6] over 10,000,0010



2015 Survey Results
Product: Spydus Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction41 1 4 6 13 15 2 87.057
ILS Functionality41 1 4 7 13 14 2 87.007
Print Functionality39 1 1 1 1 4 11 15 5 87.108
Electronic Functionality39 2 1 3 1 2 6 9 8 7 65.496
Company Satisfaction40 1 1 1 4 5 12 12 4 76.887
Support Satisfaction40 1 2 3 7 12 12 3 76.887
Support Improvement39 1 5 8 3 10 7 5 76.447
Company Loyalty38 2 1 1 4 4 10 9 7 76.747
Open Source Interest38 13 9 8 5 2 1 01.391

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS41 37.32%
Considering new Interface41 12.44%
System Installed on time?41 3687.80%

Average Collection size: 225067

TypeCount
Public35
Academic5
School0
Consortia0
Special0

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,0001
[2] 10,001-100,0007
[3] 100,001-250,00018
[4] 250,001-1,000,00010
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,0001
[6] over 10,000,0010



2014 Survey Results
Product: Spydus Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction40 1 1 1 3 17 15 2 77.177
ILS Functionality40 1 1 1 7 14 16 87.007
Print Functionality39 1 1 3 10 21 3 87.388
Electronic Functionality40 1 3 3 3 6 10 11 3 75.476
Company Satisfaction40 2 4 5 18 10 1 76.787
Support Satisfaction40 2 1 7 22 8 76.707
Support Improvement39 1 3 8 5 9 9 4 76.567
Company Loyalty40 3 2 2 2 8 12 11 87.178
Open Source Interest40 18 9 6 2 4 1 01.201

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS40 410.00%
Considering new Interface40 12.50%
System Installed on time?40 3997.50%

Average Collection size: 209037

TypeCount
Public35
Academic4
School0
Consortia0
Special0

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,0003
[2] 10,001-100,0007
[3] 100,001-250,00018
[4] 250,001-1,000,00010
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,0000
[6] over 10,000,0010



2013 Survey Results
Product: Spydus Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction19 2 2 10 3 2 77.057
ILS Functionality19 2 4 5 7 1 87.057
Print Functionality19 4 4 10 1 87.428
Electronic Functionality18 1 1 1 5 3 5 1 1 55.786
Company Satisfaction19 2 5 5 6 1 86.847
Support Satisfaction19 3 4 6 5 1 76.687
Support Improvement19 1 1 3 3 6 3 2 76.537
Company Loyalty19 1 1 1 1 2 1 4 3 5 96.377
Open Source Interest18 8 3 2 2 1 1 1 01.941

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS20 315.00%
Considering new Interface20 420.00%
System Installed on time?20 1785.00%

Average Collection size: 166778

TypeCount
Public15
Academic3
School0
Consortia0
Special1

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,0001
[2] 10,001-100,0006
[3] 100,001-250,0007
[4] 250,001-1,000,0004
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,0000
[6] over 10,000,0010



2012 Survey Results
Product: Spydus Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction36 2 1 2 21 9 1 76.947
ILS Functionality35 2 1 4 16 11 1 76.947
Print Functionality0 00.00
Electronic Functionality0 00.00
Company Satisfaction36 1 1 1 1 3 20 8 1 76.727
Support Satisfaction36 1 2 1 6 17 7 2 76.617
Support Improvement34 1 2 4 5 14 3 5 65.596
Company Loyalty36 2 1 4 1 7 9 12 97.118
Open Source Interest36 17 9 7 1 1 1 00.971

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS38 615.79%
Considering new Interface38 615.79%
System Installed on time?38 3694.74%

Average Collection size: 129848

TypeCount
Public33
Academic2
School0
Consortia0
Special1

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,0003
[2] 10,001-100,00015
[3] 100,001-250,00013
[4] 250,001-1,000,0004
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,0000
[6] over 10,000,0010



2011 Survey Results
Product: Spydus Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction21 1 6 8 6 76.907
ILS Functionality21 1 3 4 7 5 1 76.717
Print Functionality0 00.00
Electronic Functionality0 00.00
Company Satisfaction21 1 2 7 7 4 66.527
Support Satisfaction21 1 1 7 7 5 66.677
Support Improvement20 3 10 2 4 1 55.505
Company Loyalty21 1 1 4 8 5 2 77.007
Open Source Interest21 7 4 2 2 1 3 1 1 02.241

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS22 29.09%
Considering new Interface22 627.27%
System Installed on time?22 2195.45%

Average Collection size: 200666

TypeCount
Public18
Academic3
School1
Consortia0
Special0

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,0001
[2] 10,001-100,0004
[3] 100,001-250,00010
[4] 250,001-1,000,0003
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,0000
[6] over 10,000,0010



2010 Survey Results
Product: Spydus Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction23 1 1 3 4 5 9 97.658
ILS Functionality0 00.00
Print Functionality0 00.00
Electronic Functionality0 00.00
Company Satisfaction23 1 1 5 2 4 10 97.578
Support Satisfaction23 1 2 3 4 4 9 97.438
Support Improvement23 1 2 1 4 3 3 9 97.228
Company Loyalty23 1 1 2 4 4 11 97.708
Open Source Interest23 12 3 2 3 2 1 01.300

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS23 00.00%
Considering new Interface23 313.04%
System Installed on time?23 2295.65%

Average Collection size: 120296

TypeCount
Public22
Academic1
School0
Consortia0
Special0

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,0001
[2] 10,001-100,0008
[3] 100,001-250,0006
[4] 250,001-1,000,0002
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,0000
[6] over 10,000,0010



2009 Survey Results
Product: Spydus Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction22 1 1 1 1 4 7 6 1 76.367
ILS Functionality0 00.00
Print Functionality0 00.00
Electronic Functionality0 00.00
Company Satisfaction22 1 1 3 4 8 5 76.327
Support Satisfaction22 1 1 3 1 2 3 5 5 1 75.827
Support Improvement21 1 3 6 1 4 3 3 56.146
Company Loyalty21 2 2 2 2 4 4 5 96.247
Open Source Interest22 9 3 6 2 1 1 01.501

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS22 313.64%
Considering new Interface22 522.73%
System Installed on time?22 1986.36%





2008 Survey Results
Product: Spydus Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction11 1 2 6 2 87.648
ILS Functionality0 00.00
Print Functionality0 00.00
Electronic Functionality0 00.00
Company Satisfaction11 1 6 2 2 77.277
Support Satisfaction10 1 2 3 4 86.807
Support Improvement0 not applicable
Company Loyalty11 1 1 1 1 1 3 3 86.368
Open Source Interest11 7 1 1 2 00.820

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS11 00.00%
Considering new Interface11 19.09%
System Installed on time?11 11100.00%




2 Responses for Spydus in 2007

2017 : gen: 7.00 company 6.65 loyalty 6.91 support 6.35

2016 : gen: 6.73 company 6.60 loyalty 7.12 support 6.45

2015 : gen: 7.05 company 6.88 loyalty 6.74 support 6.88

2014 : gen: 7.17 company 6.78 loyalty 7.17 support 6.70

2013 : gen: 7.05 company 6.84 loyalty 6.37 support 6.68

2012 : gen: 6.94 company 6.72 loyalty 7.11 support 6.61

2011 : gen: 6.90 company 6.52 loyalty 7.00 support 6.67

2010 : gen: 7.65 company 7.57 loyalty 7.70 support 7.43

2009 : gen: 6.36 company 6.32 loyalty 6.24 support 5.82

2008 : gen: 7.64 company 7.27 loyalty 6.36 support 6.80

Comments

Slow implemention of new services. Main emphasis is on public libraries concerns (Type: Academic)

Overall we're very happy with Spydus software however the training in their product is not very comprehensive therefore, leaving us to a lot of guess work which is disappointing. (Type: Public)

We will be going out to an open tender very soon, so will consider any Library Services Platform including combinations of products e.g. Koha with Blacklight. Version of Spydus in use is several version behind their current version, about which we have good things, so rating is not a reflection on their current product version. (Type: Public)

Spydus is a pretty good system. Easy to use and there are many parameters that can be set to customise it to our needs. (Type: Public)

Managed Services system works well and we are pleased with version 9 of Spydus, especially the improvements made to the OPAC. (Type: Public)

Support costs are fair, the software is easily customized (no overlay needed), the company enables access to underlying data to create your own reports, the company makes a test site freely available, and we enjoy hosting the product on our own servers. The software works will with campus student and employee portals for easy click-through/proxy access for remote access to library services and products. Currently assessing incorporation of LibraryThing For Libraries into it. (Type: Academic)

Spydus installed in April so no response on whether levels of customer service have changed year on year (Type: Public)

The cataloguing module could be greratly improved. The system does not allow you to toggle between the enquiry screen and cataloguing editing, forcing you to close down the enquiry screen before you can edit catalogue records. Also, you cannot edit a batch of holdings records. (Type: Public)

new research and development in last couple of years has imbued the LMS with a renewed vitality and pushed it forward as a leading LMS internationally, very exciting to be a part of this new regime. (Type: Public)

User friendly and reliable LMS, could do with better intergration with eResources. (Type: Public)

New modules (enhancements) are being developed but they are not incorporated into regular upgrade of general system - required to pay extra.http://librarytechnology.org/images/nextbutton.png Different categories of customers compete for their needs to be addressed (Type: Public)

Having worked in this and other libraries using Spydus for many years, I would have to say that the quality of their training has declined. As in it isn't as comprehensive as it used to be. (Type: Public)

My main disappointment is with the release of new products and product updates. Often the product has not been tested properly at the vendor end resulting in an increased workload to 'fix' what was not previously broken at the library end. A recent experience of a client update resulted in lost charges not being removed when patrons returned items. The other disappointment is with mobile apps. Products are released before thorough testing and 'how to' info being available. (Type: Public)

Civica are responsive to their customers; user based enhancement forum feeds into the development cycle of the product; good integration of ebooks/magazines into OPAC (Type: Public)

I have worked with both Sirsi Dynix and now Civica and I feel this product is leaps and bounds ahead! (Type: Public)

My impression is that the company is under resourced so development work and fixes take too long. They have won a lot of new customers and this has sapped their resources. New releases often come out with bugs. However in terms of functionality I still think Spydus offers us more then other systems. (Type: Public)

We recently went to tender and found Civica's Spydus the best value product to address our requirements. Strong customer base in Australia (where we are) is a boon. (Type: Public)

Our considerations for new LMS: integration of Museum & Gallery collections with library ability to integrate both library and museum classification standards discovery layer that searches, physical, internal and external digital resources standards based DAM better administration and presentation of digital collections library website + ability to create other branded websites for partnership projects faster query response times (than our current system) Google like search facilities (more user centric design) Outsourced infrastructure hosting and maintenance Outsourced system librarian maintenance While Civica Spydus are developing services that are in line with our strategy. Support is still somewhat disappointing. Dealing with via email back and forth to clarify issues before even the problem begins to be resolved is cumbersome, frustrating and ineffective. It often leads to abandonment of support cases. (Type: Public)

Spydus has built in discovery layer and additional modules for Event Management, Electronic signage, self-issue, and a Business Intelligence Solution most without extra cost which means that as a smaller library we are able to have access to advanced functionality options. (Type: Public)

ILS