Inventory (UXPROD-785)

[UXPROD-1995] Item: Display of POL number, Order status, Order date and Price in the Acquisition accordion Created: 12/Aug/19  Updated: 29/Sep/22  Resolved: 18/Apr/22

Status: Closed
Project: UX Product
Components: None
Affects versions: None
Fix versions: Lotus (R1 2022)
Parent: Inventory

Type: New Feature Priority: P3
Reporter: Charlotte Whitt Assignee: Dennis Bridges
Resolution: Done Votes: 0
Labels: acq-dev-grooming, inventory, metadatamanagement, po-mvp, round_iv, short_term_solution
Remaining Estimate: Not Specified
Time Spent: Not Specified
Original estimate: Not Specified

Attachments: PNG File Screenshot 2020-10-22 at 11.22.04.png     PNG File image-2021-03-26-07-35-14-304.png    
Issue links:
Blocks
blocks UXPROD-2897 Extend RM Order Cluster with Holdings... Open
Cloners
is cloned by UXPROD-3344 Instance: Display and populate the Ac... Closed
Defines
is defined by UIIN-807 Item record. New elements. POL number... Open
is defined by MODORDERS-672 Holdings related to package POLs are ... Closed
is defined by UIIN-1995 Instances linked to package order lin... Closed
is defined by MODORDERS-461 Define and implement business API for... Closed
is defined by MODORDSTOR-201 Define "item summary" model for the a... Closed
is defined by UIIN-1858 Display acquisition accordion on Item... Closed
Gantt End to Start
has to be done before UXPROD-1607 Refined Display of Acquisition data i... Analysis Complete
Relates
relates to UXPROD-1925 Holdings: Display of POL number, Orde... Closed
relates to UIDATIMP-682 Make item field mapping changes to ma... Closed
Epic Link: Inventory
Analysis Estimator: Charlotte Whitt
Front End Estimate: Small < 3 days
Front End Estimator: Aliaksei Chumakou
Front-End Confidence factor: Medium
Back End Estimate: Small < 3 days
Back End Estimator: Andrei Makaranka
Development Team: Thunderjet
Kiwi Planning Points (DO NOT CHANGE): 14
PO Rank: 75.91
PO Ranking Note: CW: Created after ranking exercise. The solution with a minimum data set has been discussed with a MM-SIG working group and AM-Breaux.
DB: Since I have taken responsibility for this feature I have adjusted ranking to fit with my other feature rankings.
Rank: Chalmers (Impl Aut 2019): R2
Rank: Chicago (MVP Sum 2020): R1
Rank: Cornell (Full Sum 2021): R4
Rank: Duke (Full Sum 2021): R4
Rank: 5Colleges (Full Jul 2021): R2
Rank: GBV (MVP Sum 2020): R2
Rank: Grand Valley (Full Sum 2021): R5
Rank: hbz (TBD): R4
Rank: Lehigh (MVP Summer 2020): R2
Rank: MO State (MVP June 2020): R2
Rank: TAMU (MVP Jan 2021): R2
Rank: U of AL (MVP Oct 2020): R5

 Description   

Overview: For the mvp we implement the POL number in the Acquisition accordion. The POL number is a hotlink directly back to the Order record.

Usecase:
As a circulation staff I want to have easy access to order information relevant for any given search in Inventory.
When I find what I'm looking for - the given patron request - then I want to have easy access coming from the Inventory, item record and do not want to repeat my search in another app, e.g. the the Order app.

UX-wireframe for the simple implementation with the POL number as hotlink directly back to the Order record, and two elements more: the Order status, Order status date and Price.

The long term solution, would be to implement a fuller set or data elements - but that will be beyond mvp - UXPROD-1607 Analysis Complete .



 Comments   
Comment by Natascha Owens [ 30/Sep/19 ]

Cataloging staff need to see POL number and be able to click through linked number to see order information.

Comment by Charlotte Whitt [ 03/Jun/20 ]

This is critical for uChicago (round_iv) - https://folio-org.atlassian.net/wiki/display/COHORT2019/Round+IV+-+Post+MVP

Comment by Holly Mistlebauer [ 17/Jun/20 ]

Chicago comment from Round IV Outliers spreadsheet: We felt like there was too much risk for people not to know whether an inventory record was attached to a PO. UXPROD-1925 Closed + UXPROD-1990 Closed together provide a workaround for UXPROD-1607 Analysis Complete , which is the "real" feature that we down-ranked. -Tod Olson

Comment by Cate Boerema (Inactive) [ 09/Oct/20 ]

Dennis Bridges, Charlotte Whitt and I wanted to get your thoughts on which team should do the work on this feature (Thunderjet vs CF vs both). What do you think?

CC: Marc Johnson

Comment by Dennis Bridges [ 09/Oct/20 ]

Cate Boerema I've been thinking a little about this and now that we have some experience with the inventory module I'm more inclined to say that Thunderjet could probably work on implementing this workflow. It is closely related to one of our receiving features as well. https://folio-org.atlassian.net/browse/UXPROD-2373
Totally open to other opinions on this, but I think there is a lot of overlap here.

Comment by Cate Boerema (Inactive) [ 12/Oct/20 ]

Thanks Dennis Bridges! I think that would be great, as the workflow initiates with Acquisitions. It would probably require less coordination if Thunderjet could do the entire feature. And, you're right, it does seem to have a lot of overlap with UXPROD-2373 Closed .

Charlotte Whitt, if this makes sense to you, could you please reassign the feature to Thunderjet and Dennis?

Comment by Charlotte Whitt [ 05/Nov/20 ]

Notes from Slack #product-owners:

Charlotte Whitt: Today at 1:33 PM
@cate - in the Iris dashboard I'm missing UXPROD-1925 Closed and UXPROD-1995 Closed which @Dennis Bridges and his team were planning to pick up

Cate Boerema: 7 hours ago
I hadn't heard that those were being prioritized for R1. Maybe I missed a conversation?

Charlotte Whitt: 4 hours ago
Has been discussed at several RM-SIG meetings. See also: https://folio-org.atlassian.net/wiki/display/COHORT2019/Round+IV+-+Post+MVP (uChicago's list).

Dennis Bridges: 3 hours ago
@cate is correct, this was NOT actually scheduled for R1. We determined these had a lot of crossover with UXPROD-2373 Closed and that they should be implemented together. Unfortunately Thunderjet dose not have capacity in R1.

Comment by Sharon Beltaine [ 12/Nov/20 ]

Reporting SIG: For reporting, we would like the POL to link to holdings and items in particular (this is not important to us for display, we just need the data element link). Having this link enables us to have reports that link the PO with a specific holding or item. Having holdings and items links is important for summarizing costs at the order level. The thin thread implementation of this data element is fine for reporting.

Comment by Cate Boerema (Inactive) [ 16/Nov/20 ]

Dennis Bridges, could you please have Thunderjet revisit the estimates on this feature? The estimates showing here were done by Niels Erik eons ago.

Comment by Andrei Makaranka [ 18/Nov/20 ]

Hi Dennis Bridges, Cate Boerema,

There are to options:
1. It can be done only on UI side by 2 requests:
1.1 Retrieve POL by Id.
1.2 Retrieve PO and take order status.
2. Will be the most correct approach from platform and API design perspective :
2.1. Define model, which will be retrieved on UI (1SP)
2.2 Define and implement API (2SP)

Thanks

Comment by Charlotte Whitt [ 18/Nov/20 ]

Hi Andrei Makaranka
Thanks for writing up the two options. I have one question though, which of the two options (and maybe both do) will support automatic synchronization of eventually updates in the Item (or Holdings) record; e.g. when the Order status changes or the Price information is updated after the Order was created?

To the best of my knowledge, then these data are read only in the Item record (and the Holdings ( UXPROD-1925 Closed ). I guess that will lower the complexity quite a bit.

Comment by Dennis Bridges [ 19/Nov/20 ]

Note that this could be done with UI only, but the dev team recommends creating an API to support it. This will limit the number of calls needed to retrieve the information from orders and order lines.

Comment by Charlotte Whitt [ 20/Nov/20 ]

I agree, that we should create an API support as well. We need to build the most robust solution for this.

Comment by Charlotte Whitt [ 19/Jan/21 ]

Hi Holly Mistlebauer Dennis Bridges - getting this work done is often mentioned by the SMEs. Are their any change that this work can be picket up either by Dennis' team or Core Functional team for R1 2021 with the extended deadline?

CC: Kristin Martin lew235 Mike Gorrell

Comment by Dennis Bridges [ 19/Jan/21 ]

Charlotte Whitt We are still juggling the deadline changes, but I'm sorry to say I think it would be a stretch goal for us at best. Even just to include one of these two features. With the complexity of our current features it would be a mistake to commit to additional work before we have at least completed our first fiscal year UAT.

All I could suggest would be comparing the priority of these features with https://folio-org.atlassian.net/browse/UXPROD-2417 as we have not yet started implementing it. It is at risk and was not identified as a showstopper so perhaps it could be substituted for one of the others. However, it currently has a higher calculated rank.

Comment by Holly Mistlebauer [ 19/Jan/21 ]

Charlotte Whitt: This is work that would be appropriate for the Core Functional team?

Comment by Holly Mistlebauer [ 19/Jan/21 ]

Charlotte Whitt: I see. You are saying that the 'Lost & paid' status didn't show up. Got it! I am trying to test this but I can't get any of the settings in SNAPSHOT to work.

Comment by Dennis Bridges [ 19/Jan/21 ]

Holly Mistlebauer currently none of this information will display in inventory. This feature would involve making a call from inventory to orders to retrieve information based on the Instance ID, Holding ID or Item ID. This UXPROD is specifically inventory requesting information from the orders app based on the Item UUID of the item you are viewing, so it can be displayed on the item record. After a review of this feature we determined that an API should be added to mod-orders that allows Inventory to make this request efficiently and get the info it needs to display. Thus there is some BE work to be done in orders and some FE work to be done in inventory to make this work.

The acquisitions accordion on the Holding record is currently just a set of text fields stored in inventory. UXPROD-1925 Closed is about populating them with information from orders. This would be done in the same as it would be done for Item records. When Thunderjet reviewed this feature they also suggested we remove the fields from the Holding record so we aren't actually duplicating the data and storing in both orders and inventory. Rather when you load a holding inventory would query orders and retrieve and display the data to the user.

Hope that helps clarify the scope of both this feature and UXPROD-1925 Closed . I believe the stories have been groomed but may require review if Core is able to pick them up for implementation. I would be happy to share any other info we've gather on these so far and/or present them in a grooming if that helps. thx

Comment by Charlotte Whitt [ 27/Jan/21 ]

Hi Dennis Bridges and Holly Mistlebauer -
what Dennis describes sounds all perfect to me. I ran it through Niels Erik Nielsen as well.
With this approach UI-Inventory needs to wait for mod-orders to lay out the data conveniently for the UI, and we definitely would prefer only to have the data living in one module, and just displayed in Inventory.

If Core Functional can pick up this work instead of Thunderjet, that would be great.

Comment by Ann-Marie Breaux (Inactive) [ 27/Jan/21 ]

Hi Charlotte Whitt and Dennis Bridges Just trying to understand the Data Import field mapping implications. As far as I can tell, all of this will be drawn from the associated POLs automatically. Is that right? Will it only work if the item is created as part of the Order process? If the item is created as part of the Data Import process, would there be an opportunity to associate with the relevant POL manually somehow? (or via the Data Import process)

Right now, this is just a blank accordion in the Data Import field mapping screen for the Holdings record.

Let me know if we should have a quick meeting to discuss. Thank you!

Comment by Charlotte Whitt [ 27/Jan/21 ]

My suggestion is that these data elements should not be editable in the Item record (or the Holdings record for that matter, but that's a different feature, UXPROD-1925 Closed ).
The data is being populated with data being pushed via mod-orders.

You are right Ann-Marie Breaux we also need to understand how data coming from updates by using the Data Import app should be populated in the Orders and Inventory, as my expectation would be that any updates in Inventory of acquisition data, should also be reflected in Orders etc. so the two apps stay in sync.

Comment by Dennis Bridges [ 27/Jan/21 ]

Charlotte Whitt and Ann-Marie Breaux see my comment at https://folio-org.atlassian.net/browse/UXPROD-1925?focusedCommentId=11091&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel
The same should apply here as applies to Holdings. Yes, the group has acknowledged that we should not duplicate data in inventory. Rather it will be retrieved from the order app as needed.

Comment by Holly Mistlebauer [ 03/Feb/21 ]

Dennis Bridges and Charlotte Whitt - To clarify, there are two user stories the Core Functional team would need to complete: MODORDERS-461 Closed and UIIN-807 Open . Correct? The two user stories are ready to be pointed. Also correct? We are planning Juniper right now and will consider this feature depending on the prioritization of all CF features. Please change the team to Core Functional so that it shows up where it needs to. Thanks...

Comment by Charlotte Whitt [ 03/Feb/21 ]

Holly Mistlebauer

So the Core Functional team will take this features back? Cate Boerema send it in the direction of the Thunderjet team October last year (see the comments above) - but it would be all great if the Core Functional team now are able to pick up the work. I'll change the development team right away.

Comment by Dennis Bridges [ 03/Feb/21 ]

Thanks Holly Mistlebauer and Charlotte Whitt MODORDERS-461 Closed is ready to be pointed. Any technical questions the team has can be directed to Thunderjet lead BE dev Andrei Makaranka. He should also be reviewing any code committed to mod-orders. thanks!

Comment by Holly Mistlebauer [ 09/Feb/21 ]

Charlotte Whitt: I don't know when the Core Functional Team will be able to pick this up. The Juniper Capacity Plan will tell us what we can get done. This feature It is not ranked high by the institutions and we have extremely limited BE dev capacity.

Comment by Holly Mistlebauer [ 19/Feb/21 ]

Dennis Bridges:  Hi!  This feature needs to be completed early in the Juniper development cycle. Will Thunderjet be able to complete this as needed?   Thanks...

P.S.  The Core Functional Team has extremely limited back-end capacity right now, so we need some help from other teams.

Comment by Dennis Bridges [ 19/Feb/21 ]

Holly Mistlebauer I see UXPROD-2373 Closed , UXPROD-1925 Closed and this UXPROD-1995 Closed as dependent on each other. All of the BE work need for these features is related. I will make sure that the part that is required to complete UXPROD-185 Closed is prioritized higher than the rest. This may result in a split that allows us to focus on exactly what needs to be done to unblock UXPROD-185 Closed . However, I can not guarantee we will complete the remainder of all three of these features in R2.

Comment by Lisa McColl [ 25/Mar/21 ]

This Jira assumes, I think, that there is a way to deliberately relate a PO to an item. It does this by default when a PO creates an Instance, Holdings, Item. What happens and how do you add an item with its own PO to an existing holdings/item?

Comment by Ann-Marie Breaux (Inactive) [ 25/Mar/21 ]

Hi Lisa McColl You mean being able to create the link to the POL from the Inventory side? So if I'm manually adding an item record to an instance, being able to specify that item (and therefore its holdings and the holdings' instance) are related to a specific PO? What's a use case that would follow this flow? If it was ordered, then I think the POL should already be linked to the related Inventory records. But it does feel like the link (or maybe break the link and re-link) might need to be triggered from the Inventory side as well - I just can't think of a case off the top of my heard.

Comment by Dennis Bridges [ 25/Mar/21 ]

Lisa McColl for a PO to be connected to an Item record it must have a connection to an instance. We would like to provide users with a method of changing that connection if they need to move an item/holding from one instance to another. The following story describes how we will allow users to manually change the connection between order and inventory instance. 

However as Ann-Marie Breaux mentioned this would happening in the orders app. We have not yet defined functionality that would allow users to edit connections when looking at the inventory record. Use cases would help us work through that.

Comment by Lisa McColl [ 26/Mar/21 ]

Dennis Bridges and Ann-Marie Breaux - Thank you both so much for your answers!

I wasn't thinking of starting from the Inventory app. Just starting from the Orders app, if a PO is created  I see the link in FOLIO to the instance and I can see via Postman that there is an item HRID associated with it. What happens when you have a new PO that is for a purchase if an added volume, for example? That is another item on the same instance and holdings (for some libraries). How can that relationship between the newly purchased volume and the PO get established? (without a new instance being created). Or can't it? Ultimately it would be great if that PO was displayed in Inventory/Item Acquisitions accordion but I wonder how this Jira is possible because I don't see a way to make that explicit relationship when you are manually building a PO.  

Comment by Dennis Bridges [ 26/Mar/21 ]

No problem Lisa McColl, the connection is actually made at the POL level. In the UI you will see a "Look up" link under the title field which allows a user to choose an instance to connect to the POL.

The results in the UUID of the instance being added to the POL. With this connection in place when item are created in receiving the item UUIDs are also stored in the POL within the "Piece" data. Piece is our receiving record.

Part of the scope of UXPROD-1995 Closed is to provide an order API that will allow inventory to lookup order details based on it's item UUID . Allowing inventory to display an accordion with order data that is populated with information from the orders app on the fly.

Comment by Lisa McColl [ 26/Mar/21 ]

Thank you Dennis Bridges. I have to sit with this and maybe try some in our test instance to let it soak in. I'm expecting that if I create a purchase order on and existing instance record (using the lookup you mentioned above), and receive this new POL, I will see a new item related to that POL in a Postman lookup. I hope I got that right! 

Comment by Dennis Bridges [ 22/Dec/21 ]

We were able to address this functionality earlier than expected leveraging existing APIs, so it has been assigned to and will release with Lotus.

Comment by Dennis Bridges [ 18/Apr/22 ]

Testing successful in bugfest-lotus

Generated at Fri Feb 09 00:20:14 UTC 2024 using Jira 1001.0.0-SNAPSHOT#100246-sha1:7a5c50119eb0633d306e14180817ddef5e80c75d.