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

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.

Request for Alma item barcode be included in the data that is published to Primo as part of the Alma publishing functionality to enable barcode searchability in the Primo keyword search. We have discovered that items migrated from our previous ILS do contain the item barcode(s) in the MARC 945 $$i and is written to the search:general field of the PNX. As such, those items are keyword searchable via their barcode in Primo. However, for items created in Alma, the item barcode is not written to the bib record and is therefore not searchable in Primo. Adding the item barcode manually to the bib 945$$i for each item as part of our processing is not a viable alternative.

We would like an enhancement to Alma publishing that would add the item barcode to the data published in the "AVA" field. This functionality would improve workflow for staff when they need to search a record in Primo without having to navigate out of the items screen in Alma to retrieve the OCLC number, the MMSID or the ISBN, or to pull up the record in Primo when the book is in-hand without needing to key in the title or ISBN.

Examples of migrated records with the item barcode in the 945 $$i:
http://alliance-primo.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/CC:cc_alma:CP71153242760001
http://alliance-primo.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/CC:cc_alma:CP71188416360001451

The new short_loan_courtesy_reminder & short_loan_overdue_reminder cannot be configured for multiple locations. For institutions with several hourly loan locations (for example Boston College maintains 2 and 3 hour loan periods for Course Reserves and a 4 hour loan period for some technology items) this dictates that the reminder notice has to be set based on the location with the shortest loan period. The overdue notice must be timed to make sense for for the longest loan period.

In our test configuration we used the following time parameters:

​short_loan_courtesy_reminder - 105 minutes
short_loan_overdue_reminder - 241 minutes

However, this creates a situation whereby patrons borrowing from some locations will have already incurred an overdue charge before the overdue notice is sent.

In order for this functionality to provide the service is designed for, it must be robust enough to support different loan periods.

https://knowledge.exlibrisgroup.com/Alma/Product_Documentation/010Alma_Online_Help_(English)/030Fulfillment/080Configuring_Fulfillment/110General#Configuring_Fulfillment_Jobs

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.)

We'd want to be able to control the anonymisation of requests, resource sharing requests and fines and fees in a similar way to loans. In particular we'd like to be able to set a parameter for days since user expiry and since the request or fine was complete.

This would allow us to create a clear policy for anonymising and purging data in Alma so that all data was treated in the same way i.e. could say that all data was anonymised or purged X number of years after user left. It would also allow us to be confident that we are only anonymising data that we no longer need.

My libraries circulate various pieces of equipment from microphones, to musical instruments, to 3D printers, to lockers, and the current physical material type table does not suffice without adding a slew of item policies or location codes, which is messy and makes the resulting analytics more painful than it should be.

Ex Libris support states that "The [physical material type] codes cannot be changed, because Development needs them for statistics across libraries." However individual libraries will have items that they need to distinguish between either for fulfillment rule purposes or our own statistics.

I would like there to be about 15 generic material types added to this table that will allow libraries a bit of flexibility in dealing with this category. Similar to how Primo has blank PNX fields that can be used to create additional facets, etc. that best fit the needs of the library and its users.

The 'Browse Shelf List" function is essential for catalogers in our library and is extremely clunky and time-consuming to use. Proposing any (hopefully all) of the following changes:

1. Ability to view more results surrounding the exact search request.
Said in a different way, the ability to view the result in the middle of the results page, so as to be able to see a few of the results both before and after. This makes call number adjustment significantly easier, instead of always needing to click a back button and remember what the call number were on the page before.

2. Ability to view shelf-list in Primo with one click.

3. Ability to actually be able to see the entire call number in the call number field (see screen shot with blue arrow).

If I need to type the call number by hand, or edit it at all, it is very difficult to see the entire thing or use this field if it cuts itself off.

4. Removal of the need to click into the call number field to search the shelf listing.

5. Ability to search the shelf list by call number that ignores sub-field labels.

It appears to me that “Browse Shelf Listing” is done only against the 050 field in a bib record and only against the subfield “a” in that 050 field. This greatly limits the usefulness of this tool.

Not to mention, call numbers can be found in 099 and 090 fields, requiring copy paste.

Thus, the only way to search the shelf list accurately is to copy and paste the call number into that tiny, tiny box, then edit out the $$a, $$b, $$h and so on. This is a painful experience on 20+ books a day.

Right now any operator at any level with a role enabling the right to edit/delete users in Alma has the rights as well to change or delete roles or scopes of anyone else, even of the Alma administrators (!).
Roles shall be fine tuned in a much more granular way, as to have two separated types of managers and administrators.
- Patron managers shall be enabled to create and edit Patron Users, but not to edit/delete roles assigned to other users, esp. Libray staff Users.
- User administrators instead should be enabled to edit/delete roles of other users, including Library Staff Users.