In 2003, Computers in Libraries ran a quarterly series on library automation markets. The article in the April edition focused on integrated library systems for special libraries (Cibbarelli, 2003). Pamela Cibbarelli reviewed functionality and user ratings of 22 ILS products.
The first bit of the article summarized feedback received from ILS software vendors who market their product to special libraries (Cibbarelli, 2003). The survey inquired about various features of the ILS product. Results are presented in a chart organized alphabetically by company. The second part of the article addressed user satisfaction with the products. Cibbarelli had 260 respondents; products with three or more replies from users were included in the results. Features, functionality, and service were ranked on a scale of 1 to 10, with 1 as "crying for attention" and 10 as "exceeds expectations." User rating topics, mirroring questions asked of vendors, covered subjects including acquisitions, authority control, circulation, customer support, inventory, OPAC with/without Web interface, reliability, report creations, and serials.
Overall satisfaction of the 22 products ranged from 6.7, "above average/good," to 8.9, "excellent" (Cibbarelli, 2003, p. 37). CyberTools for Libraries, with an overall rating of 8.4, "very good/excellent," tied for 4th place in user satisfaction. ILS products with higher overall user satisfaction include EQS International's Q Series, Innovative Interfaces, Inc.'s Millennium, and Surpass Software's Surpass Safari. Staying true to it's mission, CyberTools ranked especially high on customer support (9.1) and reliability (8.7). It rated lowest for acquisitions, inventory, and report creation, yielding a score of 7.0 for each of these categories.
I wonder how much CyberTools takes heed of these external surveys. As tied to customer service as the company seems to be, I would believe this type of report would be of utmost relevance to them. It would be interesting to do a follow-up survey to learn how the features and services of CyberTools for Libraries and CyberTools, Inc. compares now to where the company was in 2003. Additionally, it would be fun to juxtapose the development of other products and vendors to the way in which CyberTools has evolved.
While Cibbarelli is still writing "the Helping You Buy series" for ILS software, I did not find a more current user satisfaction survey than that which was published in 2003. I enjoyed this article because Cibbarelli dedicated much of her focus to user feedback. In reviewing more current ILS product review reports, none included user surveys. I found trying to decipher the product-features matrix, which became the extent of these later articles, to be rather bland. It would help, I know, if I were looking to purchase an ILS for my library. In this case, I would have a better idea of features I would desire of an ILS. Still, even if I were in the market, I would like to know what current users thought of the product they use. I think Cibbarelli dropped an important part of her survey by no longer including user feedback. Perhaps the semi-subjective user perspective was discarded in favor of the more objective has it/doesn't have it comparison of features. This is a shame, as I find value in noting users opinions.
Further information can be found in the following sources. The most current "Helping You Buy ILSs" is in the October 2008 issue of Computers in Libraries (Cibbarelli, 2008). This article lists the up-to-date features in 33 ILS products. In the July/August 2009 issue of Computers in Libraries, "ILS Year in Review" tracks the newest innovations 24 ILS vendors have made to their software. For example, CyberTools, Inc. released an electronic resource management module. This company continues to strive for affordability; at no extra cost, the base product suite allows librarians to add "an unlimited number of links to e-resources, websites, in-house documents, and more to their collections" (Greenwood, 2009).
______________________
No comments:
Post a Comment