When using Lender Due date for RS items (Fulfillment > General > Other Settings > ignorelenderdue_date = false) the date for Pick up from shelf is the same as the Due date. This is, according to ExLibris, working as intended, but we have a few issues with the workflow.

This makes the workflow more manual and difficult than needed, given that we have to manually check RS items that is not getting picked up by patron within a couple of weeks. Having the RS items on Hold shelf for up to 4-6 weeks is poor use of time - for the patrons, the book and the library.

If we could set a Hold shelf expiry date for RS items that is shorter than Due date, it would make it easier for the circulation desk personal to remind patrons that they have a book waiting. This will give the book more time at use with the patron, and less on the hold shelf. It will shorten the waiting time for other patrons, as the book will be returned earlier to the owning library if it is no longer needed by the patron.

The best would be if this process could be automated, e.g. by TOU policy. (Much like the Hold Shelf Period policy that exist for TOU type Requests.)
If it’s not possible to populate a Hold expiry date automatically, a data field in the receiving RS items pop-ups would be helpful. (Pictures added.)

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.

With an active automatic rota for books, borrowing requests sent from Primo to Alma are automatically sent to partner. This applies for books published within the last year as well. Before we activated the autoROTA, we would usually change most of these borrowing requests into purchase requests and place the patron on a waiting list.
New books requested by a patron are often items we want to purchase ourselves, and not spend money on borrowing from our partners in addition. With the autoRota there is no way for us to block these borrowing requests from being sent.

We would like a Sending Borrowing Request Rule with Input Parameter Publication date = within last year (or 2 year, maybe optional range), and Output Parameter Send Request = False.

Currently the "ignorelenderduedate" setting in the Alma Customer Parameters Mapping Table is a global setting; it applies to all resource sharing partners. This is problematic for consortia who have resource sharing partners for consortia members, as well as a resource sharing partner for ILLiad.

Setting "ignorelenderduedate" to "true" works for our consortia resource sharing standard checkout, but ILLiad due dates must be entered manually.
Setting "ignorelenderduedate" to "false" works for the ILLiad lender due date, but then consortia due dates must be entered manually.
If "ignorelenderduedate" could be configured separately, for different types of resource sharing partners, this would allow a more seamless ILLiad to Alma integration.

User experience testing that we conducted showed that most users prefer to place resource sharing requests via the resource sharing request form in Primo. Users also expressed frustration with some aspects of the form including the format of the fields. They also expected that the Library could add notices relevant to the resource sharing service to this page.

The current options for configuring this form do not allow us to meet the expectations of our users. We would like to have more options for customising the page the form is on and the form itself. Specifically we would like :
1)The ability to customise the format and appearance of the page (e.g. the width of form fields, the positioning of the radial buttons)
2)The ability to add a notice or message to the form (this is crucial to communicate important information about the service to our users)
3)The ability to add custom fields to the form

We are trying to configure a more automated workflow for Resource Sharing in our consortium. We recently reconfigured our Resource Sharing settings. Our Partners' Locate Profiles were all changed from not checking availability (so we had time to manually manage queues) to "Check for availability" so that items will pass instantly through the Rota if an item is not available at a partner. Then each of the Resource Sharing Libraries modified their Library Details from cancelling requests on locate failure to not cancelling requests on locate failure, which keeps the request Active after it passes through the Rota unfilled, and puts it into a status of Locate Failed. Currently, there is no job to automate the process of Recalculating the Rota Assignment for requests in any Status, let alone the Locate Failed status, so we are manually passing these requests back through the Rota by manually selecting Recalculate Rota Assignment for each one. We would like to perform this automated Recalculate Rota Assignment job daily for a set amount of time or until an entered "date not needed by" gets near (monitored manually), at which point we can help the patron acquire the item via others means at our own discretion. This setup will help our requests reach available partners more quickly and allow an automated way of re-checking Partners for requested items that become available again.

My idea contents 2 concepts :
1) We would like to see the hour when the borrowing request was created.
When we have a lot of requests, we would like to be able to make a choice and treat the older before the newest.

2) We would like to sort the borrowing requests by differents ways. Presently the borrowing requests are ranked by alphabetical order of the title.
But when you have a lot of requests, like us, sometimes a new request arrives before that you treated the ancient.
So maybe could it be useful if we could rank the requests by dates (with the facet it's possible) and also by hour !

Right now Borrowing Request type "Physical non-returnable", which is the one used for document delivery (tipycally a printed copy of an article), allows to choose only the Resource Sharing Library as Pickup Location.

This is a problem, since a user is instead willing to choose the library where the printed copy should be delivered. This is particularly useful when libraries are geographically sparse.

Using a temporary item does not help, since in this case we don't have an item that must be returned (and shipped back to the lender, as it is in the ILL of a book). The user gets and keeps a printed copy: there is no return step.

Therefore please allow to choose a Pickup Location also for Borrowing Request type "Physical non-returnable", exactly as it is for Request type "Physical".

We would like the ability to view the original XML/ISO messages sent between lender and requester in our Lending requests. There is information we need that doesn’t display in requests when they come into our system.

Examples include:

*Copyright declaration: we need this for copyright compliance reporting purposes

*Maximum cost: if this doesn’t display, we have to confirm that the requesting library accepts our charges if the cost is going to be over the standard charge

*Expiry date: the request status changes to Expired if this date is passed, and the request moves on in the rota

*Need by date: the field is in the request, but the information doesn’t display. We need to be able to see this so we can notify the requesting library if we can’t supply the item in time

*Date and time that request is received: we need to know the date and time a request comes into our system so we can ensure our turnaround time meets the service level – particularly important for Express requests

Being able to view the ISO messages in requests would be invaluable.

In the SNLP workflow the partner changes from the own partner code to the partner who ships the request automatically. Therefore most of the requests have the correct partner when the item arrives at the library.
So most of the time there is no need to modify a partner and the staff's attention to this attribute is not as high as it is to other attributes of the request. If we observe this AFTER receiving the item, there is no possibility to do so.
Because we don't know to which partner we have to send back the item after it has been returned by the patron, we now have to missapply other fields of the request to store this information.
Perhaps not all libraries want to allow their staff to do so, so we suggest a new parameter which can be switched off, if it is not needed.

A borrowing article request is stopped for local ownership when the library has an electronic database that may have coverage for the journal.

Currently, the borrowing locate local ownership check does not check the year, volume, or issue in the article request to determine if the library has access to this specific year in the database. The borrowing locate does not check for embargo status.

Because the citation year is not checked for local ownership, requests are stopped from being automatically sent to lending libraries that have the article. Library staff must spend time checking if their library has access to the specific year in their electronic databases.

In Alma Configuration> Fulfillment> General>Other Settings the rsuresolverlocate can be used to check a lending library’s electronic coverage.

An additional Customer Parameter should be added to allow a borrowing library to check their own library’s database coverage information. If a request is for an article that is not within the database coverage or is in an embargo the request should be sent to the lending library without staff mediation. Requests that are found in the library’s database should be kept in the Ready to be sent status for staff to review.

This was entered as NERS enhancement request 7052.

Thanks