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.
133 results found
-
Alma to automatically process pending requests when recalls are switched back on
During Easter and Christmas vacation we turn off recalls in Alma, so requests are still placed by the user but recalls are not made. After the vacation, we turn recalls back on however Alma does not 'catch up/update' the pending requests into a recall.
We would like Alma to therefore be able to process those requests in pending and turn them into recalls once the recalls have been switched back on.
3 votes -
Generate item-level request for reading room materials
Currently, if there is one copy of an item in general stacks and another in a reading room location, assuming both are available, Alma will prioritize the stacks copy for requests and the request form will be based on the stacks request TOU. Some institutions use reading rooms for Special Collections materials, so the items may not be interchangeable and if a patron requests the reading room copy, we want the request to be specific to that item and the form to follow the reading room request TOU (limiting the pickup location).
Giving the items unique descriptions forces item-level requests,…
3 votes -
Configurable hard coded date for request expiry
We've struggled with users not understanding the purpose of the 'Not needed after' date field in the various request forms linked to Primo VE. This often means we received requests with supplied 'Not needed after' dates of a few days later meaning they're cancelled before even being in transit or picked, particularly on unstaffed weekends. Relabelling the field hasn't helped matters due to users not paying attention to it and thinking it's a 'needed/collect on' mandatory date.
If possible we would like the ability to set a hard coded expiry range for non-processed requests. For example, if a recall request…
3 votes -
Ful Resource Request Slip Letter split in two
We would like the Ful Resource Request Slip Letter printout to split in two: one letter for staff when picking material from stacks, and one for use on the hold shelf for end users to see. These two functions are difficult to combine since staff need to know who the requester is at the same time as GDPR makes anonymization of the hold shelf slip necessary.
We currently try to solve this by using the Ful Hold Shelf Request Slip Letter as the hold shelf slip. But this printout is meant only for staff and so is printed in the…
3 votes -
Add the ability to group select items in the 'Monitor Requests & Item Processes' view, the same as we can in 'Expired Holdshelf'
It would be useful to be able to group select items in the 'monitor requests and item processes' so that transit labels for them can be printed in bulk. Currently these have to be done individually per item. The ability to group select items already exists in the 'expired holdshelf' view so would (hopefully) be easy to implement
3 votes -
Be able to restrict certain libraries to particular user groups only
We need to restrict who can access one of our libraries by user groups. We need to restrict one of our libraries to only be used by users with a certain user group. We want to restrict who can collect a hold request by user group for one of our libraries.
3 votes -
Adding a parameter to block the request queue for physical items at the title level
The request queue can be confusing for library users, as such requests are often canceled due to lack of copies. With title-level requests, the library should be able to decide whether or not to allow a queue for physical item requests. It should be possible to create a parameter for this to allow blocking the queue.
3 votes -
Copyright Statuses within Digitization Fulfillment requests
In Alma's fulfillment area, processing a library/patron digitization request often requires multiple steps to get copyright approval. Currently, the copyright clearance process is a single step - a check against the Copyright Clearance Center (CCC), but if a publisher or rightsholder isn't part of CCC, the licensing process must be managed outside of Alma.
If the digitization request is a product of a citation (ie from Leganto or Alma COurse Reserves), then it would be helpful to include relevant course data and the number of students in the course as part of the request.
We propose adding a new state…
3 votes -
Allow for Pinning/Saving and Labeling of Searches from Resource Request Monitoring
Have the ability to have either an institutional and/or individual ability to save a commonly used search. There are some routine tasks involving Hold lists that would be made more efficient if we could save/pin and name those searches/tasks to our dashboard. An example is pulling just Hold Shelf Processing items from the Resource Request Monitoring. While not difficult to do, having a way to save a few clicks from reentering the search each time would save a few minutes per day and over time hours of work time. This might be viable for other functions within alma as well.
3 votes -
Physical Item Hold Requests
Multi site library - prevent users from placing a physical item hold request on items that are available on the shelf of the library they are placing the hold request from - if the item is not available on the shelf but a copy is available at a different location then placing a physical item hold request should be allowed.
2 votes -
User Requests Should Pop or Be more Visible for Cataloguers
When cataloguers are processing new books or fixing bibliographic records or item records, there is no notification that a user has requested the item we are working on. We won't know to give the item to Fullfillment so that they can put the item aside for the user.
I know there is a little number that indicates there is a request, but for new books ordered in there is already 1 request from Acquisitions. This does not pop-up and it is just a little number that you can barely see in the results screen. It should be much more obvious…
2 votes -
Configuration option to prevent Digitization request when item is on loan.
Issue: Digitization requests are typically needed “ASAP” by our users. When an item is on loan, we don’t want to recall it as it will typically take longer than the requester can wait.
Current configuration options:
When Configuring Loan Recall Requests and the following is set to “Yes” PHYSICALTODIGITIZATION - Patron digitization request for physical resource, the item will be recalled. When set to “No” the item will not be recalled, instead a hold is placed on the item.Need: A configuration option for digitization requests that does not recall or place a hold(prevent renewal) on items that…
2 votes -
restrict booking access
I would like the ability to restrict booking of equipment to certain subset of patrons. Right now, if Item is bookable, it is bookable for all patrons.
2 votes -
Permanent physical location for items in process
We have found that when working through items in process/Monitor physical item requests that the permanent location is not included when exporting to Excel. This is very inconvenient when a staff member is trying to locate the item.
1 vote -
patron names
Could the Patron name be displayed in the "Pick Up Request " window in Alma just as the 'Requestors Note". This saves time instead of having to click to find the name of the requestor.
1 vote -
Prevent placing different request types on the same item
Currently in Alma there is no cross check and no way to prevent a patron from placing both a Physical Item Request and the Digitization Request on a single item. The Ex Libris expectation is that requests will be reconciled through the request queues. However this adds additional time to the request process as it requires contacting the requester to confirm which type of request they need. I encountered the lack of a preventive configuration created a concrete clash as it came to our attention when a patron placed both types of requests on an item. This impacted 3 locations…
1 vote -
Alternative work order behavior - Usage should be departmental, not individual
We would like an alternative to how work orders work now. We want the department (or “agent”) to initiate the request, rather than an individual using their own personal account. So that usage is calculated as “departmental” or work order, rather than the individual.
1 vote -
Allow customization of the Notify User check box in Confirm Request Cancellation box.
Current default is that this item is checked, however with local processes, we would prefer not to automatically notify the patron in most circumstances. It would be better for us to opt-in than to opt-out.
1 vote -
Override patron physical item request Limit
There is a Max. physical item requests in Patron Limits.
However there doesn't appear to be an ability to allow staff to override this limit, which from time to time they need to do.
I propose that there is a parameter that allows staff with a particular role the ability to override this limit.1 vote -
Adding a physical holdings drop down to the request brief result would help in person enquiries.
Case - Currently, when a user requests an item. If the user then comes to the libary and asks a college librarian to update them about how long before the item is ready to collect. If they search for the request and no item has been return that can fulfill the request. It takes 2/3 extra clicks to go via the 'view title in search' and find out the current availability of the items within that record.
Solution - It would better if it was possible to click on a drop down of all physical holdings on that bibliographic record…1 vote
- Don't see your idea?