We’re receiving fewer print periodicals than ever and yet the process for receiving and claiming print periodicals is more cumbersome and time-consuming than ever. Alma automatically generates a number of expected issues based on frequency with expected receipt dates even though this doesn’t reflect the reality of print periodical receiving where the receipt date may vary and issues are sometimes combined, which requires extra adjustments. If a subscription stops for some reason after expected issues have already been generated it’s necessary to remove the expected issues. Or, in the case of a publication delay, the dates for all expected issues need to be adjusted. Again this doesn’t reflect the reality of print periodical receiving.
Our first ILS was NOTIS which, in spite of limitations in other areas, was superior for print periodical receiving because of its elegant simplicity. There was a Receipt Line that was a free-text field. When a new issue came in all a user had to do was update the number. For instance it might look like this:
v.27 no.1 (2021: Spring)-v.27 no.2 (2021: Summer)
On receipt of v.27 no.3 the line would be updated:
v.27 no.1 (2021: Spring)-v.27 no.2 (2021: Fall)
Next to the Receipt Line was an “Activation Date”. This date would be automatically updated each time the line was modified, although it could also be manually changed. If the activation date passed a claim would be generated. It would say, “The last issue we received was…” and the date. Activation Dates were based on frequency: fourteen days for weekly titles, thirty for monthly and quarterly, sixty days for annuals, and so on.
If an issue was received out of sequence a new receipt line would be added and the activation date on the previous line would be updated to send out a claim the next day, although we now do most print issue claiming directly through our vendor’s database (we use Ebsco for most print subscriptions), so this could be done at the same time.
Receipt Lines also displayed to the public so library users would have a clear, concise view of what they could expect to find on the shelves, which is still important for print periodicals.
There was also an option to add Note Lines with information such as when a specific issue had been claimed and what reply, if any, had been received.
While I'm not suggesting copying NOTIS (among other things there may be proprietary issues) something similar could be a great improvement. It would save time and require less training and specialized knowledge.
I realize a great deal of work has been put into the current design. I also realize predictive systems are standard, not just for Alma but for most if not all currently available library management programs, but they’re still a bad idea. Ex Libris could take the lead in adopting something similar and better.