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.

When setting recall period on a fulfillment loan to "No recall due date", the original due date is kept, while renewal of the recalled loan is blocked.

For some reason, a different logic is applied to lending requests. Setting "No recall due date" as the recall period policy for lending requests, results in the due date being set to the date of the recall. The result is unpredictability for the borrower.

We propose that that these two very similar workflows are better alligned and that setting "no recall period" for recall should result in no change to the due date on a recalled lending request.

Audun Skorstad
Unit – The Norwegian Directorate for ICT and Joint Services in Higher Education and Research

When using Lender Due date for RS items (Fulfillment > General > Other Settings > ignore_lender_due_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.)

Currently, when a borrowing request item is received, the due date of item is set by the lender's TOU. If the due date falls on a library close date, the due date remains unchanged. This causes the problem when clients are misled by the due date and would visit the library to return the item even though the library is closed. We would like to add in the Closed Library Management policy type to the RS Borrowing TOU so that we can indicate in the event the due date of the RS request falls on a library close date, Alma can change the due date base on the library preferences (similar to the Closed Library Management Policy rule in Loan TOU).

When working on resource sharing requests lists (lending and borrowing) the first thing to do is selecting another search entry/term, mainly an aspect at the end of the list, to find a special request, because the author ist never the aspect we search for. The list in the pull down menue is hard coded and there is no option to re-order the list as we need it.
At least we like to achieve that the list starts with the last three search aspects the staff user has used. Alma has to remember them for the logged in staff user similar to the functionality developed for the NUI in connection with other topics (i.e. last location - currently at... or last searches in the persistant search box).
We need this functionality for Resource Sharing Requests as well.

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.

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.

The Query to Patron letter functionality for Borrowing Requests in Alma has recently been reimplemented to use the standard mail configuration in Alma. By some reason an exception has been made for the "addressFrom" setting, where it instead still uses the default address for the Resource Sharing library.

This is counter intuitive, as the addressFrom value is still configurable for the letter, only it doesn't have any effect. I'm still surprised my case (#00609529) was identified as a documentation issue and not a bug.

If you like us has selected to not implement a separate Resource Sharing library, this also effectively prevents us from using a separate address for these letters. When switching to the new letter type, this was the feature we most looked forward to ...

Please make this setting take effect for the Query To Patron Letter just like for any other letter.

(If there are use cases where this would make things worse, please consider adding an general option to toggle between the two styles!)

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".