It would be exceptionally helpful to be able to run Analytics reports on all areas of Alma Configuration.

It should be possible both for each individual library to run the reports on their own behalf, AND for libraries belong to a consortium, possible for consortial staff to run the reports across all institution zones simultaneously for comparison between member IZs.

Use cases:
1) Reviewing a spreadsheet containing all of the settings in a configuration area makes settings review easier, and reduces errors. Needing to click between screens and take screenshot to compare settings is cumbersome, and leads to mistakes or unintended differences between settings. It is also easier to review many settings in comparison to each other (example, Fulfillment TOU and Rules), and it is easier to discuss the settings with colleagues through a report format.

2) Since Alma does not maintain an internal change log to configuration changes for most settings, it is possible that library staff may accidentally change configuration and be unable to recover what the settings were prior to the change. The ability to run reports provides libraries with the opportunity to snapshot their settings, in case edits occur that need to be reverted.

3) When libraries are in a consortium, that consortium may have consortial configuration settings/policies that each library should follow. Without the ability to run reports on Configuration settings, consortial staff must log in to each member's institution zones individually, and review each setting manually. This is inefficient, leads to the potential for error, and can impact the patron's experiences. This also prevents consortial staff from being able to provide reports that allow member institutions to compare their settings to the settings of other member institutions for baselining.

We have been using Voyager since 2002, and have had the ability to report on Voyager System Administration settings. I have found those reports invaluable in my time working at the consortium, and would appreciate the same access in Alma/Primo VE configuration.

It would be cool if we could include active HTML in our dashboards.

For example, ibrarians who are reviewing new electronic acquistions could pull up a list of new acquisition and, in a one click, link directly through to the resources. (Currently, they would need to pull down the report, find the URL in the data, then copy and paste that back into the browser)

Additionally, outside images (via <img> tag) could be incorporated into reports for branded presentations.

By default in OBIEE, only Administrators have the right to use HTML in the data format of any column.

This can be remedied simply by adding the HardenXSS element to the Oracle BI Presentation Services Configuration file and setting it to false.

Ref: http://gerardnico.com/wiki/dat/obiee/hardenxss

Thanks!

Michael Johnson
University of Minnesota

Library personnel would like to be able to generate a list of titles and related records in Analytics so as to document title changes, facilitate research and scholarly discovery and develop research guides for use within the institution. At this time, the 76X and 78X fields that are used to display various related record types in Primo VE are not currently indexed in Analytics. Rather than use up the limited number of bibliographic local param fields available – which would still not allow for full reporting on related records – our institution proposes that the aforementioned fields and associated data be indexed in Analytics to facilitate full reporting.

Reference – Related Record Types: https://knowledge.exlibrisgroup.com/Primo/ProductDocumentation/020PrimoVE/034GetItConfiguration/ConfiguringDiscoveryInterfaceDisplayLogicforPrimoVE#ConfiguringRelatedRecordServices

Thanks

In many out-of-the-box analytics, the capacity to look at content by LC Class exists. However, LC Class doesn't capture the interdisciplinary nature of some areas of study. Additionally, not all e-resource vendors provide LC classes for eBooks.

Could it be that one way of achieving this is through assigning titles to collections? This would seem to work since titles of all formats can be assigned to collections in Alma. If Primo does not currently allow for subject-specific "profiles," this would also achieve that functionality since collections can be turned on as a facet.

The most basic problem to this approach is that collections are not currently known to Analytics. Off-hand, it would make sense to add this to physical items, e-inventory, and digital usage.

It might also make sense to allow for some functionality that can auto-assign content to collections based on some rules (subject headings?).

Currently, when running a prompted report, if you want to change your selections after running it, you must go back to the catalog and start over from "Run". It would be a great time savings if there were a "REPROMPT" option, which took you directly back to the prompt screen. Inclusion of a "retain choices this session" toggle and a "clear all choices" button on the prompt screen would be useful as well.

A use case would be when I am trying to determine why a particular item is hanging up on a task list or is being prevented from withdraw/delete. Sometimes this can be sussed out by looking at the item hit list information in Alma, or the item History tab, but I have found it is often quicker to pull up the item in Analytics using an analysis that prompts for barcode and returns MMS Id, Title, Author, Ownign Library, Call number, Request Type Description, Managed by unit (latest step), Active request flag, Modifocation date, Current process, Lifecycle, and Modified by. After checking one item, I would love to be able to click on "Reprompt" and be returned to the prompt screen with my cursor in the input box.

Similarly, I have an analysis for finding items with mismatched locations and item policies. I first run an item count by Location and Classification Code. Where "unallowed" combinations exist, I need to find the specific items and fix. Creating or modifying an advanced search in Alma Repository Search is cumbersome, hence the analysis. It prompts me to select a Location and a Classification Code, then returns the barcode, MMS ID, Title, etc. Again, the option to return directly to the prompt screen (and have my previous selections retained, so, for example, I can keep the location and change the classification code or choose to clear all) would make working through a list of several combinations much more efficient.

Course-reserves data available in Analytics does not include
the unique 16-digit identifiers for course and reading lists. They are retrievable only via the API. This is adequate for operations dealing with a single course or reading list, but it would also be useful to be able to obtain, e.g., a listing of all
courses and their associated ID numbers for a specific academic year, lecturer or department, to facilitate batch operations.

On the other hand, the IDs for reading-list citations are available from Analytics (Citation ID),
but there is no field indicating to which course or reading list a particular citation is assigned.

The MDE shows the operator of various versions of a bib record. When a bib record is imported via an import profile that creates inventory, however, the staff operator that ran the import is not identified as the creator of the bib, holding, and/or item record. We often did Access queries in Voyager to identify bibs, holdings, or item records created or modified by particular staff members or student assistants. I can see that we could do such a report from Alma on bib record operators of versions after the initial import and I can also see in the Item history tab the operator who made changes to the item record. But I cannot find in the documentation the ability to identify the operator who ran the import, or the identity of the operator that modified the holding record. In fact, the documentation shows that the creation of a bib record via import only shows the creator as "Import" (our instance of Alma says a record we imported today via an import profile was created by ExLibris, which is equally unhelpful). Because we have multiple staff doing multiple imports every day, searching through the list under Resources/Monitor and View Imports for individual bib records to find who imported them is unrealistically time consuming. And since we change the holdings location to Withdrawn in order to distinguish such materials from deleted records that we don't want to count, we need to be able to identify holdings records modified by our student workers on particular days in order to check their work.