Situation
One of our tasks in checking reading lists is ensuring that the version of each title is the latest edition. Acquisitions staff will check book citations on a reading list and, if there is a newer edition available, purchase and replace the citation on the list with this new version.

Problem
When a specific title is used on multiple lists, Acquisitions staff are having to manually identify all citations using this title, add the newer edition to the reading list, and remove the older edition from the reading list.

Staff are also having to manually transfer any specific reading/public/resource notes across from one citation to another.

Request
We would like functionality that would allow us to “find and replace”, or “find and merge” all citations populated by a specific repository bibliographic record, and allow us to replace, merge, or overlay the citation details with the bibliographic information from the newer edition while retain citation specific information such as public notes or chapter information.

User story
Checking a reading list, Library staff find a citation for the following title:

Molecular biology of the cell
Bruce Alberts
5th ed
9780815341062

This book is included on 24 reading lists. This includes book citations and chapter citations. Some of the citations include public notes for students.

On checking suppliers, staff identify that there is now a sixth edition available, purchase copies of this title, and import a bibliographic record for this into Alma. The library now has a record for the following title:

Molecular biology of the cell
Bruce Alberts
6th ed
9780815344643

Library staff want a way to search for all the citations that are populated with the 5th ed (9780815341062) and to automatically replace these citations with the records and holdings for the 6th ed (9780815344643) without losing the citation information that is specific to that reading list.

At the moment Alma offers very little to properly handle Leganto broken links via the task-list menu. Once a Broken Link Alert is removed, the information is gone from Alma entirely. The functionality is inadequate as a workflow for library staff when investigating and recording details of our progress in fixing the problem, keeping students informed and statistical reporting.

We would like to see additional functionality :
• Broken Link Alerts to have a more permanent record in Alma and Analytics
• Introduction of additional fields to capture information about the Broken Links - for example broken link status (e.g. reported, under investigation, resolved), ability to note if the student has been informed & by which member of library staff, nature of problem, resolution date.
• Ability to report on these fields in Analytics
• Ability to sort the list of broken links by Reported date on the Edit Citation page.

Sometimes instructors perform a citation search in Leganto and just add the first result that comes up in the search results; often this is actually a book review or other format that isn't logical for reserves. Additionally, most instructors are searching and expecting the latest edition to appear first in the list. Other faculty from certain departments want to choose a particular edition, and so need edition information prominently surfaced in the search result.

This results in processing delays as staff must check with instructors to clarify what items they really intended to place on reserve.

One possible solution may be to offer an option for faculty to specially indicate that the submitted citation must be filled as specified (format/edition). Something could indicate that by default, any available edition can be substituted for the one added to the list as a result of search.

There are many courses that, for a variety of reasons, intentionally do not have reading lists. The fact that this is deliberate is not immediately obvious though, and confusion can arise when people expect there to be a list connected to the course.

Students might wonder if they are doing something wrong, librarians might have to keep separate spreadsheets to note which ones are supposed to be empty and instructors might be confused when asked to make lists in their LMS.

For these courses, there should be some way to identify that the absence of any lists is by design and not by accident. Instead of there being a binary choice (Either there is a list or there isn't), you should have a third option: No list for this course.

It would be good if this was a setting in Alma that could be checked at the course level, and/or something the instructor could choose through the LMS integration. This function should also be reflected in Analytics, so that institutions can easily see which courses have, should have and should not have reading lists.

Currently the only way to export reading lists in Leganto is exporting them one at a time. I would like to suggest an option for a bulk export of reading lists, where one can export more than one list in a single operation.

A possible workflow could be adding an ‘Export’-option in the “Find lists”-menu, and using a prompt for selecting lists to export. It could additionally be available in the “My lists”-menu.

Ideally the export options should be the same as when exporting a single list or section, with choices like File Type, Bibliographic Styles and Sorting.

There are several possible use cases where this would be helpful. Such as faculty administrative staff wanting to export several lists from a department.

We are a consortium, and we have a certain number of e-book records without inventory in our network zone. Deleting these records is not an option for us for various reasons.

The expected Alma behavior for such records if there is no inventory is to publish as physical. It applies to both Primo and Leganto.

Use case: an instructor uses the expanded search to check for newer edition of a book they have previously used in a reading list. They add what seems to be a newer physical edition from 2020. In reality, the record is an e-book published as such in 2020, but it has the same content as the 2018-edition, hence no newer edition has been released.

The first issue is that because of the expected behavior, the user is presented with incorrect information.

A second issue is that the library will potentially waste a lot of time trying to track down a 2020-edition that doesn't exist.

As a result, we would like the expected behavior to be changed so that electronic records are shown as such, regardless of the inventory.

Our instructors are big fans of My Collection but they are missing features that are available for lists:

1) Sections or folders. Having tags is nice but in no way the same thing

2) Drag & Drop citations to re-order the list. Goes together with 1) - at the moment there is no way to bring structure to My Collection which makes it cluttered and takes the joy out of working with it.

3) Separate the menu options into "Suggest item for a list" and "Add item to a list" so that there is a clear distinction between adding something to your own list vs. suggesting it for someone else's list.

4) Make the private note visible in the list view of My Collection.

5) Print. This is possible for lists but for My Collection you have to export the citations before you can print them.

6) Edit item from list view instead of having to open it in full view.

The option to manually add static URLs to citations is extremely helpful. We use it in various ways, but mainly to point users directly to the resource when it is not possible to do it automatically. However, managing manually added URLs is a nightmare due to the lack of functionality in this area. Whenever an URL needs to be changed (e.g. an EZproxy prefix has to be removed etc.), it must be changed manually.

We would like to have a possibility to search for and replace/delete part of the citation's source URL by running a job on a set of citations - a feature similar to "Delete or replace url's prefix" in in Change Electronic Portfolio Information job, but better. This would save us a lot of time and would be extremely useful in cases where such changes are urgent (e.g. for security reasons).

Problem: A lack of FRBRisation in bibliographic records in Alma means that in Leganto different formats of the same title can only be offered on individual citations, i.e. the print edition will be one
citation, and the eBook will be on another citation. We want to be able to offer all available formats of a title to our students.

Impact: Without the ability to combine citations of the print and electronic version of the same title, they currently appear as if they are two required readings (see attachment 1).

The lack of ability to combine multiple versions of the same title clutters the display of the reading list, creates a misleading volume of readings, and generates duplication of effort.

Desired outcome: We would like to be able to add a citation for a title in a certain format, and from that citation, search for related versions in other formats and combine these into a single Leganto citation. These would then appear in the same display as FRBRised citations (see attachments 2 and 3).

If possible, it would be helpful if we could also combine our holdings for different printings/editions of the print format in order to meet demand across related titles in our collection.

Could the actual text of the Library Discussion Note be included for Instructors when they receive a Notification that there is an outstanding Library Discussion via the Leganto Detailed Notifications Letter.

Currently, the Letter only tells the Instructor that there is a Library Discussion waiting for them. They then need to log-in to Leganto to see what it is. Providing the text would enable the Instructor to determine whether they need to log-in to Leganto and action something in the list or not, and would bring the letter in line with other email notifications e.g. service desk messages, where they can see the conversations within the email itself.

At the moment, creating sets for Leganto to run jobs on is a pain - contratry to other indices in Alma you can't just click 'Save Query' and then run a job on the set.
No, you have to create a list either from an Excel export or Analytics and then create an itemized set from it.

This is extremely annoying because you have to create a new input list and a new set every time you need to run a job.

Please enable the creation of (logical) sets for citations, reading lists, and courses from a search in Alma (as it's possible for e.g. physical items, order lines and many others).