2016 Library RFID Survey Results – Rest of the World
This year’s survey was not actively promoted outside of the English-speaking world. Without the support of suppliers and others it is frankly beyond my means and ability to attempt a truly global survey.
Nevertheless a few readers of my blog and followers on Twitter did take the time and trouble to answer the survey in English – and I am extremely grateful for their support.
With such limited numbers it is not possible to gain any kind of accurate picture of the international scene but the answers are nonetheless interesting.
There were 7 responses from 4 different countries.
Library types were mixed – including the only National Library to have responded to this year’s survey.
Despite the low numbers one obvious difference between these European libraries and their counterparts in the UK, ANZ and North America is the extent to which RFID is being deployed. Everyone uses RFID to prevent theft with only one not also using it for circulation but beyond these two functions the number of libraries using RFID for User Identification, monitoring in-house use of stock and automated materials handling were all proportionately higher than outside of the European market.
Bibliotheca+3M were once again in the majority in these European libraries with both Nedap and Autocheck appearing for the first time in this survey – both in the Netherlands. One other Dutch supplier – that I know very well! – also completed the survey but their answers are not included as I was only looking for the opinions of librarians.
All the respondents use HF frequency solutions and all use SIP to communicate with their library management software. Only one also used an API to deliver additional functionality.
Only Bibliotheca+3M libraries replied in sufficient numbers to be worth analysis and their results are given in the following table,
|Poor||Not very good||Good enough||Very good|
|Answering helpdesk calls?||0%||0%||100%||0%|
|Responding to development requests?||0%||50%||50%||0%|
|Quality of their advice?||0%||0%||75%||25%|
|Resolution of hardware problems?||0%||0%||75%||25%|
|Quality of project management?||0%||0%||50%||50%|
|Response to equipment failures?||0%||25%||50%||25%|
|Response to software problems?||0%||25%||50%||25%|
|Speed of implementation?||0%||0%||75%||25%|
|Relationship with your ILS/LMS/ILMS provider||0%||0%||75%||25%|
Finally three libraries had found other uses for their self-service kiosks – all three allowing users to make catalogue enquiries. No-one used their kiosks for non-library services and no-one had, so far, allowed library users to use NFC equipped smartphone in conjunction with stock.
There were no additional comments.