Kip Darling

My feedback

24 results found

  1. 9 votes
    How important is this to you?
    Kip Darling supported this idea  · 
  2. 6 votes
    0 comments  ·  RapidILL » Other  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?
    Kip Darling supported this idea  · 
  3. 4 votes
    0 comments  ·  RapidILL » Other  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?
    Kip Darling supported this idea  · 
  4. 4 votes
    0 comments  ·  RapidILL » Other  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?
    Kip Darling supported this idea  · 
    Kip Darling shared this idea  · 
  5. 5 votes
    1 comment  ·  RapidILL » Other  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?
    Kip Darling supported this idea  · 
    Kip Darling shared this idea  · 
  6. 46 votes
    1 comment  ·  RapidILL » Borrowing  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Kip Darling commented  · 

    This important issue can impact the value institutions receive from their RapidILL subscription. Until a resolution is implemented, members should take the following steps for rejected eBook chapter requests:

    1. Have library staff manually check RapidILL holdings for alternative ISBNs or E-ISBNs that produce a positive match.

    2. If an alternative ISBN is found, edit the request with the matching ISBN, then resubmit to RapidILL.

    3. If no alternative ISBN matches, check other suppliers to fulfill the request, confident in the knowledge that you haven't missed a holding on RapidILL.

    By following this workflow, you can maximize the value of your RapidILL subscription while mitigating the impact of rejected eBook chapter requests.

    Kip Darling supported this idea  · 
  7. 82 votes
    2 comments  ·  RapidILL » Lending  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?
    Kip Darling supported this idea  · 
  8. 181 votes
    How important is this to you?
    Kip Darling supported this idea  · 
  9. 15 votes
    0 comments  ·  Alma » Analytics  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?
    Kip Darling supported this idea  · 
  10. 28 votes
    How important is this to you?
    Kip Darling shared this idea  · 
  11. 50 votes
    2 comments  ·  Primo » Primo VE  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?
    Kip Darling supported this idea  · 
  12. 76 votes
    How important is this to you?
    Kip Darling supported this idea  · 
  13. 28 votes
    How important is this to you?
    Kip Darling supported this idea  · 
  14. 56 votes
    How important is this to you?
    Kip Darling supported this idea  · 
  15. 10 votes
    How important is this to you?
    Kip Darling supported this idea  · 
  16. 9 votes
    How important is this to you?
    Kip Darling supported this idea  · 
  17. 19 votes
    How important is this to you?
    Kip Darling supported this idea  · 
  18. 26 votes
    How important is this to you?
    Kip Darling supported this idea  · 
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Kip Darling commented  · 

    Great idea.

    Would also like to see this as an option for the partner record that can be configured to display on the 'Resource Sharing Partner List' screen. Once added, it would make it quickly accessible when processing claims.

    (I suppose in theory the existing 'code' option could be used, although only when first creating the partner record, as it can't be amended afterwards. I'd rather retain that field for the location code though, and have a separate 'billing code' option added in)

  19. 36 votes
    How important is this to you?
    Kip Darling supported this idea  · 
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Kip Darling commented  · 

    Thanks for this one. At the moment we use a template for a book strap which contains ownership details, a space for the barcode from the RS receive slip, a space for a sticker with renewal info (4 options), and a space for handwriting the condition of the item. Then a separate bookmark insert with (handwritten) identifier, item title, requester details, due date and (printed) information about our service. If we could combine all (or most) of this info into a system generated book strap, then processing incoming books would be so much easier.

  20. 43 votes
    How important is this to you?
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Kip Darling commented  · 

    Yes, love this one. Some request statuses are confusing for users, and this does lead to queries that could be avoided by them simply not having 'mirrored' access to specific internal process steps/ information.

    Kip Darling supported this idea  · 
← Previous 1

Feedback and Knowledge Base