If an user has found an article that is not available electronic, but the library has the journal in print, the end user gets the list of holdings for the journal and can go into a specific holding to see the items.

In general we would like that when the end user has found an article they should only need to click on Request (or Digitize) and all relevant metadata are sent to Alma and the system selects the correct item to fulfill the request. If locate is not possible the librarian has enough information to work on the request.

The end-user are on the article level while the system are on the journal/issue level.

The end-user gets a lot of items and need to find the correct item either using the drop-downs or the navigational buttons. Not very user friendly. Could it be made easier to display the items that might fulfill the request by preselecting based on the metadata in the record?

This sceanrio are described in this screen-recording:
https://cloud.bibsys.no/index.php/s/XWASfMFpqbmFYpK

If there are no items to fulfill the request or the end user gives up finding the right item the Request a different issue option should contain more metadata that is sent to the library. This issue are adressed in this idea:
https://ideas.exlibrisgroup.com/forums/308173-alma/suggestions/36901999-improvements-to-request-form-when-article-is-not-a

When receiving Resource Sharing Borrowing items, the 'Automatically Print Slip' option is only remembered for the current session, which leaves this vital function open to error.

This could be improved in one of the following ways (in order of preference):

Option 1: Provide a configuration option in one of the code tables to set the default (this would also be desireable for all similar functions elsewhere, such as in RS Lending).

Option 2: Make the last selected option persist across sessions so our staff can set it once and not have to remember to set it every time.

Option 3: Change the default setting to 'Yes'. (This was done for RS Lending back in 2016 under Idea 'Change default of Automatic Print Slip from No to Yes in Alma RS'). This is the least preferred option as it may disrupt other institutions workflows.

We are disappointed with the technical support service provided by Ex Libris. We strongly believe that Ex Libris should provide customers with more effective, prompt and interactive service.

There should be an option to call or chat online in real time with a support person who has a sound understanding of the product in question. This would be in line with all system vendors we have previously dealt with.

We appreciate that there will be some issues that are designated as bugs or enhancements and will require more in depth investigation. However, a direct call/chat option with a properly trained support analyst would quickly and efficiently separate these issues from more general product queries. We are aware that there are many call-logging options used widely by other companies, such as FastCall, TenFold and RingDNA, which can be used to allow customer calls/chats to be registered directly in Salesforce. We believe that Ex Libris should implement this improvement as soon as possible.

Please vote to show your support for this idea and feel free to add comments relating to your experience of this issue.

Problem:
It is not possible to easily find IZ bibliographic records that have associated PO lines but no inventory. The All Titles Advanced Search has an option to search for “Has inventory | equals | no”, but those results include bibliographic records that have related holdings records (bound withs), as well as bibliographic records that have holdings records but no item records. We want the ability to easily find bibliographic records that have only a PO line associated with them.

Use Case:
The ability to find bibs with only PO lines attached is necessary in order to keep the database tidy. Examples include:
bibliographic records that migrated with PO lines or order records attached but no inventory.
bibliographic records where inventory was relinked but the PO line left behind.

Potential solutions:
The NZ has a job (Identify records that are not used in the Network) that provides operators with several options for defining which records are considered “unused”, including those with no inventory and not part of a boundwith relation. One potential solution to the problem is to have a similar job in the IZ that would allow us to find bib records with PO lines but also exclude holdings records with no items.

Another potential solution to this problem is to have a new search index (and corresponding indexed field) in Alma that would allow an advanced search for bibliographic records with attached order records but no holdings/inventory records.

Colecciones permanentes:
Si un título tienen todos sus ítems asignados a una colección permanente de documentos perdidos, extraviados, descartados, etc. , el sistema Alma debe evitar que el registro se recupere y visualice a través de Primo, esto a fin de que los usuarios no visualicen un recurso que no tiene la biblioteca y a fin de evitar de realizar otro proceso de cambio.

Permanent collections:
If a title has all its items assigned to a permanent collection of lost, missing, discarded documents, etc. , the Alma system must prevent the registry from being recovered and viewed through Primo, so that users do not visualize a resource that the library does not have and in order to avoid carrying out another process of change.

I believe this is an expansion on this idea https://ideas.exlibrisgroup.com/forums/308173-alma/suggestions/31119715-title-level-request-and-item-level-request

But we are dealing with ASRS in our case so I thought it might be a little more elaborate.

We would like to have the option to allow each items’ request policy with specific parameters (location, keyword etc.) to be excluded from the title-level request policy.

Currently we have "No requesting" as our general policy that's applied to all of our items except for the ones in ASRS. The problem is that when items with multiple copies and identical call number exist both at open-stack library and ASRS, the No requesting policy takes precedence over everything else even if ASRS items are set as requestable.

It would be beneficial if the patrons are able to choose freely where they want to request from based on the items’ availability instead of having No requesting applied across all locations, especially when the item is actually "requestable" in ASRS.

There is currently no mechanism within Alma to ensure that exported or published binary MARC records have valid record structures. Even though Alma uses MARCXML and is not impacted internally by invalid binary MARC, libraries must still provide binary MARC records to external entities in the course of regular business (vendors, outsourcers, agencies, other stakeholders).

Structurally invalid binary MARC records significantly hamper data sharing for libraries. A third party application, MarcEdit, can be used to validate MARC record structure, but since our data is stored in Alma, there should be a mechanism *native to Alma* that validates binary MARC structure prior to export or publishing.

An internal job or process to validate the structure of single or files of binary MARC records should be added so that customers are not reliant on a third party application for this.

When the close_paid_lost_loans parameter to false and lost loans are closed (either manually or through the Close Lost Loans job), refunds/credits are not automatically given to patrons if the item is subsequently found and returned. When setting the close_paid_lost_loans parameter to true and the lost loan is closed (automatically setting the Lost and Paid status), a refund/credit IS applied to the patron’s account if the item is subsequently found and returned, providing the Lost Loan Refund Ratio is greater than 0.

For libraries that wish to take advantage of this new Process Type, but do not wish to issue credits automatically for Lost and Paid items, this can cause some problems. Staff must monitor and waive these credits as they often negate other fines on the patron’s account. In addition, the credit can cause problems with automated financial processes (i.e. Bursar integration) as credits transmitted to the financial system can act on non-library fees owed, or create automatic refunds that may or may not be due depending on the refund policies in place.

Proposed solution: When setting the close_paid_lost_loans parameter to true, we’d like an additional option to allow or block the automatic refund/credit when a lost and paid item is found and returned. In other words, we’d like the option to keep the new Lost and Paid Process type, but also the ability to actually close the loan completely as is done with regular Lost Loans.

Sometimes providers change a journal’s publication frequency throughout the year. So, the prediction’s pattern selected / elaborated at the beginning of the year doesn’t work anymore in Alma. One part of predictions (date of receipt) will be ok until the change but all other predicted items will be false. Now, we can revise the prediction during the year but we must erase the items already received. We can also leave the prediction defined at the beginning of the year and edit manually the false items from the time of the prediction change.

It would save a lot of time if Alma could change the description (number, date, …) only for the items that are impacted by a new publication during the year. We would just have to fill the « Next prediction item’s information » with the new frequency.
This enhancement would save a lot of time to catalogers.

The Fulfilment Configuration Menu is huge and difficult to peruse. Can the Leganto & Courses options be consolidated on a Courses/Lists page.

Would it be appropriate to move Discovery Interface Logic to the Discovery page - it all impacts Primo VE?

I know they are grouped according to the menus in Alma, but even adding a level of hierarchy via expand/collapse for groups would make it much easier when scanning the page. I also know search exists, but sometimes I can't remember the name to search for, I just know it is in Resource Sharing - but for me most of those options are hidden "below the fold".