Alma
Your feedback matters to us. Help us improve Alma by telling us what you’d like to see using the message areas below. You can also can support something already posted.
We would love to be able to respond to every idea that is submitted, but this is not feasible. We are, however, committed to responding to the most popular ideas—those that have received the most points.
For more information please review our FAQ and guidelines. Thank you.
89 results found
-
Please integrate aspect „last copy within library / IZ / NZ“ within “Withdraw Physical Items” process
Ex Libris recently expanded the “Withdraw Physical Items” process to include more individual configurable aspects.
We would like to suggest to include the aspect “last copy in the IZ (thus: do not delete!)” as well, which would protect the last copy from deletion.
It would also be great to be able to protect the “last copy in the same library" or "last copy in the NZ” during the deletion process, if necessary.
We are familiar with the “Retention Information - committed to retain: yes” feature, but it is too troublesome for us to use, because we would have to actualize…
74 votes -
Make it possible to mark items as "unavailable"
Please make it possible to mark items as "unavailable". This marking can be used in two situations: when an item or a set of items becomes temporarily unavailable to readers, and when items are withdrawn permanently.
Marking should be both manual and by running the job "Change Physical items information".
Ex Libris' advice to use a process is inappropriate because neither a process nor a process-related request is required in these cases.90 votesDear colleagues,
Thank you for raising this idea.
This idea is related to another one - https://ideas.exlibrisgroup.com/forums/308173/suggestions/48370850, which was part of the CERV cycle in 2025, but did not make it to the final list.
During the analysis, 3 possible approaches were discussed, each has a different estimation and effort:
Option 1: New dedicated process type
- It will be possible to mark specific items as "unavailable", similarly to the way it is possible to mark them as "missing"
- Items marked as "unavailable" will be considered as "not in place"
- The new "unavailable" option will appear as a possible process type in all the places where there is a list of process types, including configuration options such as Fulfillment Unit Rules
Option 2: Mark a location as "unavailable"
- It will be possible to mark a location as "unavailable"
- All items in this location will be considered as "not in place"
- The…
-
Decouple temporary item policy and temporary location
Sometimes we have to set a temporary item policy for items that stay in their permanent location. This requires setting "Item is in a temporary location" = yes and setting the temporary location to the permanent location for the temporary item policy to apply. We would like the ability to set the temporary item policy without needing to set a temporary location.
Furthermore, no warning message is given when "Item is in a temporary location" = no and a temporary item policy is selected. This can lead to confusion because the temporary item policy is not emptied after the setting…
6 votes -
Zeros after the decimal point disappear in the price in order line items
The problem occurs when editing an order line item where the price contains zero or two zeros after the decimal point (e.g., 31.90, 37.00, 24.80). The price was entered correctly in the Acquisition Department in the format with a decimal point and two characters following it.
When the copy was edited in the target library to add the missing data, the following message appeared during saving:
Confirmation Message - Please note the following: The value in the "inventory price" field does not match the defined structure. Are you sure ypu want to perform this action?The system automatically “cut” the…
124 votes -
Customize search indexes for any Holdings field and subfield
The current Holdings indexes skip several valid fields, such as the 347 and 562 fields. The ability to index these fields (especially the 562 field) would help find records with local information that is only recorded in the holdings record.
Additionally, the ability to index any field and subfield combination would allow libraries to use custom subfields within a valid, relevant field (e.g., a 541$g for a non-public Gift Of note).
3 votes -
Allow customers to select multiple retention reasons for Item records.
Allow customers to select multiple retention reasons for Item records.
As an institution that is very enthusiastic about using the new Retention Information data fields for item records in Alma, we would like to request an enhancement that enables a user to assign multiple values to the Retention Reason field. For example, a single item could easily have all of the following statuses applied:
Institutional last copy
Faculty publication
Rare
Committed to some Shared Print program
Digitized material
Each of these retention reasons may correspond to different library staff workflow. For example, these retention reasons could support the following staff…
66 votes -
Browse Shelf Listing Call Numbers - 852 $$j
Under the current design, browsing shelf listing by 852 $$j is not a supported feature in Alma.
Example:
852 18 $$b SBG $$c 91 $$8 222 B $$h 22/Z 1244 $$= l $$9 00 $$j 22/Hbl E 600 $$9 09 $$x DE-22For the holdings' field 852 subfields $$h 22/Z 1244 and $$j 22/Hbl E 600, the holdings call number “22/Z 1244 22/Hbl E 600” will appear only when the browse term is “22/Z 1244 22/Hbl E 600” or “22/Z 1244,” but not when the browse term is “22/Hbl E 600”.
We need a 'Browse Shelf Listing' that lists ALL…
25 votes -
Add item process type when creating a new item record
Currently when creating a new physical item record, you cannot populate the process type field. You must create the record, then go back in and edit the record to add the process type. DUPLICATING an item record does allow the process type to be updated, but creating a new item does not. The extra clicks to go back into an item record to edit it really adds up for Catalogers having to do this repeatedly throughout the day.
Here is a screen recording showing the issue when creating a new item record:
https://app.screencast.com/zw7GhHEnH5Won85 votes -
reuse sets with uploaded Excel Files
Currently, we can create itemized sets of physical books by uploading an Excel sheet of barcodes. But, we are not able to reuse the set in the same manner.
We would like to be able to create one set (for withdrawing books, etc.). Then, when the job is completed, we would like to reuse that set, upload a new Excel sheet and run another job. This will cut down on the number of new sets we need to create for a single task.
Thank you for considering this idea!
1 vote -
Add the Work Order Types sorting option
Hi Everyone,
We're working on our Work Order types and departments to get a better overview of items under repair and others in libraries. I can't figure out how the WO types are sorted in the fulfillment desks, they seem to be randomly placed when I add them!
The issue is about the sorting of work orders types in a circulation desk. I made video captures I can share if you like. As you can see on it I added 3 work orders type to a circ desk and I can't understand their sort in the circ desk parameters.
And…30 votes -
Make Cataloger notes searchable in Alma and/or Analytics.
It would be helpful if the data in the Cataloger notes within bibliographic records were searchable, possibly through Advanced search, keyword search, or even within Analytics. This would allow catalogers to easily gather these notes and organize them for specific resources related to projects that require review.
22 votes -
Apply physical item template with POL template
The POL template allows a small number of item record elements to be saved: library, location, material type.
It would be beneficial to save staff time by allowing staff creating POLs to also select a physical item templates when creating a POL. This would allow setting defaults such as copy ID, item policy, is magnetic, and pieces, that are generally known at the time of order.Templates are essential time savers.
11 votes -
Auto Populated Copy ID Number Added to New Item Records
I'd like to propose streamlining the Alma item record creation process by enabling automatic population of the Copy ID field with "1" for new items. The system should also allow for easy modification of this default value for subsequent copies (2, 3, 4, etc.).
Currently, the manual entry of "1" is often missed, leading to errors and requiring time-consuming batch corrections. Implementing this auto-population feature would significantly reduce data entry time and the need for monthly clean-up reports, ultimately improving efficiency and data accuracy.
This idea was previously suggested by Leona Hughes on June 24, 2020, but was closed: (Automatic…
13 votes -
Add clarifying language to the Delete Holdings records with no Physical Items job
Adjust the wording on the “Delete Holdings records with no Physical items” job to match wording from the “Withdrawn Physical items” job. Change “Delete bibliographic records” to “Delete bibliographic records that have no other holdings” AND "Suppress bibliographic records” to “Suppress bibliographic records that have no other holdings from publishing”. This would add needed clarity to what is happening when running the "Delete Holdings records with no Physical items" job.
4 votes -
Missing Padding Option for Accession Number Sequences in Call Number Generation
Currently, Alma does not support padding (adding leading zeros to reach a fixed number of digits) for accession number sequences used in the automatic generation of call numbers (e.g., via the "Generate" / "Calculate" button in the item editor). If the next sequence value is set to "0003," the leading zeros are removed upon saving. Even if the next sequence remains "0003" in the sequence configuration, the zeros are still automatically stripped when generating the next call number in the item editor.
Institutions that use custom call number schemes requiring padding can therefore only use Alma’s "Generate" or "Calculate" button…
9 votes -
The Provenance field in the physical item editor
We would like the Provenance field in the physical item editor to be mandatory.
It is possible to have a default for the list but that is not the same thing. We are afraid people will be not so attentive, and the default option will be the one they always choose. We want it to be mandatory and default to nothing. The user then has to choose something in order to save the item.1 vote -
Job “Withdraw Physical items” and holding of related records
With the “Withdraw Physical items” job, Alma does not provide the option of preventing the deletion of holding and bibliographic records when there are Holding of related record. We would like an additional option “Delete holdings; delete bibliographic records that have no other holdings and that have no Holding of related records”.
36 votes -
Ability to create additional note fields in the physical item editor
At the physical item Editor, we currently have access to one public note, one Fulfillment note, 3 internal notes and 3 statistics notes. We would need 3 additional public note fields visible to the user in Primo and 3 additional internal note fields.
24 votes -
Simplify item scanning when processing is complete
Operators would benefit from not having to choose a Work Order Type and Status when the treatment is complete. It is not always easy to find out which cataloguing or repair operation has been carried out on an item. And above all, it's not useful if Done =“No” is selected.
Couldn't you put this last line at the beginning of the form, and open the Work Order Type and Status boxes only if "Yes" has been ticked, rather than the other way round?
Thank you and thank you for supporting this modest proposal.
Nicolas
88 votes -
Add Ability to Exclude Holdings Records from LHR Publishing to OCLC When Holding/Bib Records Are Suppressed from Discovery
Currently, Alma's LHR Publishing job for OCLC does not exclude holdings records from publishing when the holdings record or the related bibliographic record is suppressed from discovery.
We request the addition of an option in the LHR publishing job to exclude such holdings records from publishing to OCLC. This functionality is particularly important for suppressed holdings records, as the management tag for publishing to OCLC is set at the bibliographic level. Currently, if a bib record contains two holdings records, it is not possible to publish one holding to OCLC while excluding the other.
25 votes
- Don't see your idea?