Login  |  Register          Free Newsletter Subscription
Subscribe to LJ Magazine
Email
Print
Reprint
Learn RSS

The Competition Heats Up

Migrations from legacy systems will accelerate

By Marshall Breeding & Carol Roddy -- Library Journal, 4/1/2003

In 2002, the move away from outdated systems fueled sales in the library automation market. Companies with legacy systems pulled out all the stops to retain customers and entice them to migrate to their replacement systems. This year we'll take a look at which companies gained and lost ground in the competition for market share and study the issues likely to impact the industry over the next few years.

Companies today are seeking to increase revenue through products and services beyond the basic library automation system. Digital library systems, reference linking products, federated search environments, and enhanced-content web-based OPACS are but a few of the products that increasingly influence the marketplace.

Even with this shift, maintenance costs on integrated library systems (ILS) supply the most constant fuel for the automation economy. Companies reap an average of 39% of their overall revenue from system maintenance, and the size of the installed customer base has an enormous impact on the financial health of a company. Thirty-two percent of revenue came from the sale of systems, 13% from non-ILS products, and 6% from hardware. Miscellaneous revenue accounted for the remaining 10%.

Few company changes

The slate of companies remains the same as last year, although epixtech, inc., is once again Dynix and Sanderson Computing is Civica. Following a period of consolidation of companies, this year was uncharacteristically quiet. The activity playing out in the industry today, which has even greater impact on libraries, is the consolidation of library automation systems within companies.

Many firms oversee multiple library automation systems—either because they have developed a new system to replace a legacy product or have gained systems through acquisition. These companies are channeling their customer base toward a single system. An example is the libraries that run systems of the former DRA, now under Sirsi. With Unicorn firmly established as Sirsi's strategic product, sites running DRA Classic, Taos, INLEX/3000, and MultiLIS are being encouraged to migrate to Unicorn. Other companies have explicitly defined strategies that support two systems where the systems don't serve the same customer base of libraries. The Library Corporation with Library.Solution and Carl.Solution and BiblioMondo with PortFolio and Concerto fit this bill.

Revenues hold steady

In 2002, the overall market remained basically flat relative to the previous year, which in these economic times can be taken as a positive indicator. We estimate gross revenues of the overall automation marketplace at $530 million (+/- $20 million). This estimate represents the gross revenues of all the automation companies that sell to libraries in the United States and Canada. We count each company's worldwide sales of ILS and non-ILS library software, hardware sales, maintenance, and other products and services, provided they relate in some way to library automation.

Included are the number of new contracts for each company. However, contracts to consortia, large urban systems, and school systems include multiple libraries. For those companies that are able to provide revenue, the breakdown is as follows: Innovative Interfaces led at $70–80 million; Sirsi follows at $55 million; and both Endeavor and The Library Corporation were in the $25–30 million range. Ex Libris's revenue was $20–$25 million. Both Gaylord and BiblioMondo were between $15–$20 million. Auto-Graphics, Book Systems, Inmagic, and VTLS were all in the $5–10 million range.

New faces at the top

Several companies made changes in top-level management, and, in an interesting trend, all the recently appointed top executives come from outside the library automation industry.

Jack Blount replaced Lana Porter as president and CEO at Dynix. Blount has executive experience in the high-tech industry, and we expect to see advancements in Dynix's development, building on the strengths of what is already the industry's largest army of programmers.

Pat Sommers finished his second full year as CEO of Sirsi Corporation. Consistent with his background in the information industry, Sommers has led Sirsi toward a product suite that emphasizes integrating content. Ex Libris Group in June named Sami Kamhi as its new president, replacing Ehud Arad, company cofounder and longtime president. Kamhi also has many years in the software industry. Endeavor's president, Jane Burke, stepped down in early 2003, and Roland Dietz, formerly managing director of global sales and marketing for the Science and Technology Division of Elsevier, was named her successor. Dietz has a long history with libraries from the publishing side and an academic background in systems software development.

Private ownership, limited information

Most of the companies in the library automation industry are privately owned. A few of the firms, especially Dynix, Sirsi, and BiblioMondo, have acquired capital from outside investors. The public companies in the industry include Endeavor (subsidiary of Elsevier Science), Auto-Graphics, Geac, and Open Text. Most of the publicly held library companies are small divisions within larger organizations, and the financial performances of each division are not usually detailed.

The top dog

No one company can be considered the leader overall. However, several companies take the top rank in specific areas:

  • Dynix supports the most multiuser systems, with 3,338 installations of Dynix, Horizon, and NOTIS combined;
  • Sirsi sells the most multiuser systems with 207 contracts for Unicorn;
  • Innovative Interfaces maintains the highest retention rate of libraries migrating from its legacy system Innopac to the newer Millennium;
  • Follett's Circulation Plus and Catalog Plus outsold all other single products for school libraries with 4,088 units sold;
  • Sagebrush led the school libraries market with 4,396 sales from Winnebago Spectrum, Sagebrush Athena, and Accent;
  • Gaylord employs the highest number of staff in proportion to installed libraries, a ratio of one support person per every six sites;
  • Dynix, with 454 reported FTE staff, has the largest overall personnel count.
The migration factor

The migrations that will play out in the next three years will shape the future of the library automation marketplace. The ability to retain customers will determine which companies will dominate the market five years from now.

Almost all the libraries were replacing obsolete systems. Although few would characterize their current automation system as perfect, libraries rarely leave current systems out of dissatisfaction with support or functionality. Migrations are just too costly.

Many of the same companies that support legacy systems offer new generation systems. While we don't have comprehensive numbers, some trends have emerged:

  • Sirsi attracted a majority of libraries from the DRA Classic system to its Unicorn system. A large number of DRA libraries also went to Innovative Interface's Millennium and Endeavor's Voyager, with a few large sites going to Ex Libris's ALEPH 500. The vast majority of INLEX/3000 libraries that migrated this year selected Sirsi's Unicorn. Taos libraries that migrated in 2002 almost universally selected Unicorn—offered to them as a lateral migration without significant cost.
  • Gaylord saw mixed success in attracting its Galaxy libraries to Polaris, retaining fewer than half. Others went to TLC/ CARL's Library.Solution, Innovative Interface's Millennium, and Sirsi's Unicorn.
  • VTLS saw larger numbers of its VTLS classic sites move to Virtua. Its retention rate scored higher internationally. Many of its competitors picked up one or two VTLS Classic sites in North America.
  • Geac watched many of its ADVANCE and PLUS customers migrate to other systems in 2002.
Market potential

Stronger sales can be expected in the next few years. In early 2002, 4,272 libraries were operating legacy systems. Sales that year lowered this number to 3,767, or about 12%. In a time when the tax revenues that support public libraries are low and when academic libraries face cutbacks, many institutions delay capital investments in library automation. But the time frame for operating these legacy systems is finite—probably limited to another three to five years. While each vendor assures its customers that it will support these systems indefinitely, rapidly aging hardware platforms and operating systems will drive migrations.

Librarians seek not only increased functionality in the ILS itself but tools to both help manage the electronic content they purchase and create content from digital projects. In the academic library sector, we expect strong demand for digital library systems, reference linking products, federated search tools, and other products that support multifunctional web-based library portals (see Table 6). For more on the public library market, see "The Public Library: Size and Sizzle," below.

The school market

A subset of the automation industry has long specialized in school libraries. Follett Software and Sagebrush Technologies are the two powerhouses in this market. Book Systems is a rising firm, and many other smaller companies sell automation systems to school libraries.

The traditional approach for school libraries involves standalone systems within each facility, with an optional product for searching all the libraries in the district. In the last two years, we have seen a trend toward marketing multiuser systems as centralized library automation solutions for school districts. Several vendors of multiuser systems are entering the school market. In 2001 Sirsi licensed a version of its Unicorn system to Sagebrush Technologies, which is marketed under the name Accent. This year Innovative Interfaces created a new executive position, director of school library sales, and a new product, Via, which is specifically for school districts. The Library Corporation also announced the creation of a schools division and SchoolLibrary.Solution, its new product.

Independents vs. consortia

Consortial sales are important. While new consortia are not being formed, consortia sales are growing. Acquiring an ILS through a consortium saves libraries money, compared with the alternative of each library supporting an individual installation. There are also savings through shared systems support, cooperative cataloging opportunities, and other areas.

Quality of support

A key issue for librarians in selecting an ILS vendor is the quality and quantity of the support they can expect. This year, we attempt to quantify the resources available within a company for the delivery of support (see Table 5). We report only the companies that support multiuser systems for public and academic libraries. While we have similar information for those vendors that support school libraries, discrepancies in how companies count sites has resulted in statistics that do not reasonably predict service quality.

Technology trends

While the current systems are mature and rich in features, librarians exert strong pressure for improvements. In turn, all companies focus on how to meet their customers' enhancement requests and develop increased functionality for potential customers.

This year, one of the focal points of new development is increased interoperability—the ability for an ILS to interact with external systems. Interest lies in establishing interoperability with circulation-oriented functions through the NISO Circulation Interchange Protocol (NCIP). The adoption of NCIP as a standard will help drive a variety of functions (such as resource sharing, patron enablement, and self-checkout) that require system-to-system interactions through circulation modules.

These days a viable system must include a web-based OPAC with basic patron enablement features such as reviewing checkouts and online item renewal. Beginning in 2000, products such as Sirsi's iBistro and TLC's YouSeeMore introduced the enhanced web OPAC, where book jacket images, tables of contents, abstracts, and reviews complement the basic bibliographic and holdings information. Library vendors have run in droves to Syndetic Solutions, the company best able to provide enriched content. Every firm reported that they offer a content-enriched web OPAC.

Digital library products—tools that allow libraries to create and manage local digital content—are also in demand, especially by large academic libraries. One of the first companies to offer such a product was Sirsi; its Hyperion Digital Media Archive debuted in 1997. Endeavor offers the ENCompass digital collection management system, Ex Libris offers DigiTool, and most recently Dynix announced its DigitaLink.

Metasearching and linking

Metasearching, or federated searching, where a user keys a search term and receives results from multiple information resources, is also pushing the development of the ILS. While Z39.50 makes federated searching for bibliographic information fairly easy, today's library environment includes a complex mix of information resources. In an ideal world, the patron should be able to find information from all the library's leased information resources and the catalog through a single search, presented in a relevant and understandable fashion.

This ideal will not be easily fulfilled, but a variety of products are emerging that go a long way toward that goal. Some non-ILS companies that specialize in metasearching include MuseGlobal and WebFeat; several ILS vendors license their technologies. Metasearch companies also license their products directly to libraries, while some ILS vendors, such as Gaylord, have crafted their own metasearching capabilities.

Reference linking continues to spark interest, especially among academic and research libraries. These libraries need to provide ways to move users from citations to full text to document delivery services and online catalog searches. The OpenURL specification provides an important piece of this functionality. A NISO committee is developing an OpenURL standard, but in the meantime, a number of systems support the prestandard OpenURL specification. Ten companies indicated that they offer a product that supports OpenURL.

For academic libraries, a natural area of convergence lies between the ILS and courseware systems. Libraries struggle to attract students to their electronic resources, while students are daily using courseware packages. Early efforts in this arena include Endeavor's recent integration with the two major courseware packages, WebCT Visa course management system and Blackboard Learning System. Expect others to follow soon.

See also Company Profiles ...

 

TABLE 1 System Sales 2002
CompanySystem NameNew LibrariesExisting LibrariesTotal Contracts
Multiuser Systems for Academic and Public Libraries
Sirsi CorporationUnicorn Library Management System72135207
Innovative Interfaces, Inc.Millennium7165136
DynixHorizon4371114
Endeavor Information SystemsVoyager44044
The Library Corporation, TLC/CARLLibrary.Solution61970
VTLS Inc.Virtua ILS—Integrated Library Systems263460
Ex LibrisALEPH 500481058
BiblioMondo inc.PortFolio152540
GeacV Smart92534
CyberTools, Inc.CyberTools for Libraries26026
Gaylord Information Systems Polaris Integrated Library System61521
BiblioMondo inc.Concerto51520
Auto-Graphics, Inc.Impact/VERSO18119
Keystone Systems, Inc.KLAS10313
GeacADVANCE6410
Systems for School Libraries
Follett Software CompanyFollett Circulation Plus and Catalog Plus2,4141,6744,088
Sagebrush CorporationWinnebago Spectrum1,4039352,388
Sagebrush Athena1,2087781,986
COMPanion Corp.Alexandria6468841,530
Book Systems, Inc.Concourse1,0093521,361
Softlink America Inc.Softlink Alice500150650
Mandarin Library Automation, Inc. Mandarin M32250225
Insignia SoftwareInsignia Library System1280128
BrodartAmlib Library Management System1390139
Sagebrush CorporationSagebrush Accent20222
Softlink America Inc.Softlink Liberty321122
Systems for Special Libraries
Inmagic, Inc.DB/Text for Libraries3871,0341,421
Softlink America Inc.Softlink Library Corporate153045
Open Text, Inc., BASIS DivisionTechlib6814
Inmagic, Inc.BiblioTech PRO9211
The numbers reflect the number of contracts sold. Since many contracts can be for consortia, school districts, or large urban systems, they do not necessarily represent the number of libraries using each product.

TABLE 2 Market Sector Percentages by Library Type*
CompanyAcademicPublicSchoolSpecial
Percent of systems sold
Auto-Graphics, Inc.5681116
BiblioMondo inc.58555
Book Systems, Inc.197119
Brodart229618
COMPanion12952
CyberTools, Inc.150085
Dynix18521218
Endeavor Information Systems665029
EOS International000100
Ex Libris5921020
Follett Software Company12961
Gaylord Information Systems69103
Geac 1361026
Inmagic, Inc.000100
Innovative Interfaces, Inc.642916
Keystone Systems, Inc.100090
The Library Corporation117694
Mandarin Library Automation, Inc.112843
Open Text, Inc., BASIS Division70093
Sagebrush Corporation34885
Sirsi Corporation3246418
Softlink America Inc.00919
VTLS Inc.4812337
*Numbers are calculated as overall percentage of number of systems sold in 2002.

TABLE 3 Installed Sites by Individual Product: Systems for Public, Academic, and Research Libs.
CompanySystem NameInstalled 2002Installed 2001Gain/Loss
DynixDynix2,3232,356-33
Sirsi CorporationUnicorn Library Management System1,2521,055+197
Endeavor Information SystemsVoyager1,159866+293
DynixHorizon975958+17
Ex LibrisALEPH 500900700+200
Innovative Interfaces, Inc.Millennium871745+126
The Library CorporationLibrary.Solution489413+76
BrodartAmlib Library Management System39481+313
VTLS Inc.VTLS UNIX (Classic)280276+4
Sirsi CorporationDRA Classic243322-79
GeacVubis Original218250-32
Sirsi CorporationMultiLIS205246-41
GeacADVANCE205230-25
Gaylord Information SystemsGalaxy165245-80
Innovative Interfaces, Inc.Innopac144209-65
GeacVubis 4 Windows136377-241
BiblioMondo inc.PortFolio130225-95
Ex LibrisALEPH 300124155-31
VTLS Inc.Virtua ILS 11557+58
GeacPLUS90100-10
Auto-Graphics, Inc.Impact/VERSO7414+60
GeacBookPlus5562-7
Keystone Systems, Inc.KLAS5142+9
Gaylord Information SystemsPolaris Integrated Library System4832+16
CyberTools, Inc.CyberTools for Libraries4823+25
DynixNOTIS4074-34
BiblioMondo inc.Concerto381,200-1,162
Sirsi CorporationINLEX3659-23
GeacV Smart3413+21
VTLS Inc.VTLS MPE31310
The Library CorporationCARL.Solution25250
Sirsi CorporationTaos333-30
CASPR Library Systems, Inc.LibraryComna243na
CASPR Library Systems, Inc.LibraryNetna198na
CivicaSpydusna191na

TABLE 4 Installed Sites by Individual Product: Systems for School and Special Libraries
CompanySystem NameInstalled 2002Installed 2001 Gain/Loss
Follett Software CompanyFollett Circulation Plus and Catalog Plus37,30336,008+1,295
Sagebrush CorporationWinnebago Spectrum17,09815,216+1,882
Sagebrush CorporationSagebrush Athena11,84610,165+1,681
Softlink America Inc.Softlink Alice9,0008,000+1,000
COMPanionAlexandria8,381nana
Inmagic, Inc.DB/Text for Libraries7,9447,557+387
Book Systems, Inc.Concourse6,9037,374-471
Mandarin Library Automation, Inc.Mandarin M33,0602,715+345
Open Text, Inc., BASIS DivisionTechlib221229-8
Inmagic, Inc.BiblioTech PRO8760+27
Sagebrush CorporationAccent7553+22
Softlink America Inc.Liberty360nana
Softlink America Inc.Softlink America Corporate4533+12
CASPR Library LibraryWorldna2,744na
Systems, Inc.Columbia Library Systemna2,271na
EOS InternationalGLASna1,825na
CASPR Library Systems, Inc.LibraryWorksna728na
New Generation Technologies Inc.LIBRARYSOFTna337na
Insignia SoftwareInsignia Library Systemna191na
EOS InternationalQ Seriesna154na

TABLE 5 Number of Sites per Company's Support Staff
CompanySupport StaffSitesNumber of Sites per each Support Staff
Gaylord Information Systems352136.1
Innovative Interfaces, Inc.1451,0157.0
Sirsi Corporation2081,7398.4
Ex Libris (USA), Inc.1101,0249.3
The Library Corporation545149.5
Keystone Systems, Inc.55110.2
Geac Libraries Division5373813.9
Auto-Graphics, Inc.57414.8
Dynix2163,33815.5
CyberTools, Inc.34816.0
Endeavor Information Systems521,15922.3
VTLS Inc.1742625.1

TABLE 6 Sales of Non-ILS Products
CompanyProductCategory2002 Sales
EndeavorENCompassDigital Library Product46
EndeavorLinkFinderPlusReference Linking62
Ex LibrisSFXReference Linking37
Ex LibrisMetaLibMetaSearch45
Ex LibrisDigiToolDigital Library Product7
Auto-GraphicsAGentMetaSearch4
DynixDigitaLinkDigital Library Product0
Innovative InterfacesDigital Collections SolutionDigital Library Product61
Innovative InterfacesWebBridgeReference Linking48
Sirsi CorporationHyperion Digital Media ArchiveDigital Library Product15


Author Information
Marshall Breeding (breeding@library.vanderbilt.edu) is Library Technology Officer, Jean & Alexander Heard Library, Vanderbilt University, Nashville. Carol Roddy (croddy@oplin.lib.oh.us) is Executive Director, Ohio Public Library Information Network (OPLIN), Columbus

 

The numbers in the tables, counts of systems sold or installed, do not carry equal weight. The type/size of the systems should be noted. A system sold to a large consortium may represent hundreds of sites and a contract value of many hundreds of thousands of dollars. A sale to a small school, special library, or any small operation could have a contract value under $1000. Companies that focus on the special/school library market have large numbers of small sales (1000+). Companies that deal with academic/public libraries have a moderate number of sales (100+). Those that sell to consortia may have only a handful of sales. The determination of the success of each company should be based on sales revenues (when available), the total number of systems sold, and the type and size of library customers. This year 32 companies responded to the survey, with a total of 56 systems (including legacy systems supported but not sold).

The Public Library: Size and Sizzle

The public library market doesn't really exist—at least when discussing automation systems. With diverse automation needs, service philosophies, customer expectations, and financial pressures, public libraries fall into three markets: the large, the small, and a broad group in between.

The big guys

Major urban libraries and large consortia serve the bulk of the country's public library patrons. Their automation needs closely resemble those of large academic libraries in collection size, the complexity of their delivery challenges (metasearching, for example), and in the need for web-delivered services. But two factors set them apart: their enormous volume of transactions and the pressure to provide network delivery with sizzle.

With circulation reaching 15–20 million transactions per year, speed and capacity are the primary factors these libraries demand from their ILS. To play in this arena, companies must demonstrate successful installations of this size.

As to the sizzle, all public libraries are under pressure to deliver their product directly to consumers via the web. Their competitors are Amazon.com and Barnes & Noble, but eBay and L.L. Bean are raising the bar for online services. Today's public wants shopping cart functionality, live help, easily navigable screens, and immediate gratification. In turn, libraries expect their automation vendors to help make all this possible.

Leaving legacies

Many of the largest public libraries are still sitting on legacy products. In a quick survey of 35 libraries with annual circulation over six million, over two-thirds remain on Dynix, DRA Classic, Carl.Solution, and, in a few cases, homegrown systems. Some can be expected to make changes in 2003.

The final third have migrated to Innovative Interfaces or Sirsi or use TLC's Carl.Solution (CarlWeb 3.x). Large public libraries face two main questions in 2003: How many of the Dynix libraries will migrate to Horizon, and what will be the outcome of the competition between Innovative and Sirsi for this share of the automation market?

The little guys

Underfunded and frequently remote small libraries often have more in common with school and special libraries than they do with the large publics. Typically these libraries still have no automated catalog.

Money is the key driver. It is rare for a library of this size to be able to afford a standalone system. The widespread penetration of networks and increased interest in resource sharing has made this market sensitive to solutions that function in isolation. Boards and directors demand that any product they purchase communicate with other libraries.

For small libraries, service and support are the next most important factors in making an automation decision. An examination of 30 highly rated small libraries serving populations under 10,000 in Hennen's American Public Library Ratings found that 60% were not yet automated. Eight, or 26%, were members of an automation consortia. Only four had standalone systems. Those on consortia systems were using the same products as the largest public libraries.

There is also a third option. A few firms, notably Auto-Graphics and CASPR, offer company-hosted web-accessible systems (so-called ASP arrangements) that provide the same freedom from technology maintenance that a consortium does, with the independence of a standalone catalog. These products usually provide only very basic functionality.

In the middle

Between lie the large and increasingly sophisticated mid-sized libraries. Their collection sizes and transaction volumes barely strain today's automation products, so capacity is less of an issue. But this group also seeks sizzle and marketing sophistication: enriched content, links to related web sites, online book clubs, chat reference, and more.

As with smaller libraries, service, support, and the standards that underpin resource sharing matter. In addition, tight financial times demand increased productivity. Seamless interoperability among acquisitions, accounting, and collections are vital. Scheduling packages for public PCs, self-checkout functions, and RFID technology can free staff time. Most vendors claim at least some compatibility with all these features.

Having it all

Mid-sized libraries want these increased functionalities out of the box, fully integrated, and for low prices. Vendors must protect costly development resources to meet the needs of their installed base while responding to RFPs that may have a laundry list of features. It is not surprising that the same vendors that compete successfully for the business of large libraries can be found throughout the public library world. Innovative Interfaces, for example, has made inroads among independent mid-size public libraries.

Two extremely significant companies in the middle space are Gaylord and TLC. Both claim that their products, Polaris and Library.Solution, respectively, are built from the ground up for public library needs (implying that others are not).

Gaylord believes Polaris can compete along with any vendor product for the largest systems' market. Its strategy is to implement systems to larger and larger libraries. Gaylord emphasizes a high degree of integration and claims to have integrated all the pieces seamlessly. TLC makes its product easy to configure and highly customizable, with minimal support needs. That works, depending on staff expertise and on whether or not the library is involved in resource sharing. One other factor clearly differentiates these two products: TLC makes no pretense of providing a product for consortia, while Gaylord believes Polaris has strong potential for consortia of all sizes.

Email
Print
Reprint
Learn RSS

Talkback

We would love your feedback!

Post a comment

» VIEW ALL TALKBACK THREADS

Related Content

Related Content

 

By This Author

Sponsored Links




 
Advertisement
Sponsored Links

More Content

  • Blogs
  • Podcasts
  • Photos

Blogs


Sorry, no blogs are active for this topic.

» VIEW ALL BLOGS RSS

Photos

Advertisements





LJ NEWSLETTERS

Click on a title below to learn more.

LJ BookSmack
LJXPRESS
LJ ACADEMIC NEWSWIRE
LJ REVIEW ALERT
CRÍTICAS
©2008 Reed Business Information, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Use of this Web site is subject to its Terms of Use | Privacy Policy
Please visit these other Reed Business sites