Versions Compared

Old Version 3

changes.mady.by.user Kristin Martin

Saved on

compared with

New Version Current

changes.mady.by.user Kristin Martin

Saved on

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.

...

Attendees

Discussion items

ItemWhoNotes
Minute taker?

Announcements/UpdatesAll

 Washington Meeting Updates/Follow-up

  • Virginia Martin: A priority is making sure that serials functionality is clear within the acquisitions modules. So far, most modules seem to be more focused on one-time purchases. 
  • Owen Stephens:
    • Renewal behavior on the purchase order line and invoice line still need to be defined. It's complex because it crosses multiple modules: orders, invoices, agreements, etc. We need more examples and use cases to work through in detail.
    • Ensuring that staff can work through a set of stages and steps and note that each one is completed. This could be a task list or workflow. This might go beyond ERM.
    • The idea of a dashboard also came up as a way for people to track tasks and get alerts. The ERM team is going to look into this work from their own perspective, but the dashboard would have potential to be used by other areas.
  • Kristin Martin: We might want to revisit the original workflow discussion because tracking is such an important component of ERM and serials. 

Notes from RM: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1XdE9zjN_gDUtFN5GrNBszYIbWaNHlcJ_

Notes from ERM: https://drive.google.com/drive/u/0/folders/1fg90fCAq2aMGcdX4BbxGPIOkH-9hwb0f

  • People are encouraged to review and leave comments

PC working on Market-Viable Product Plan: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1JPRKF_FyZbP4Tv5ynTIhyDefTNt9juCpvaCkIcWH0A0/edit

  • What institutions can commit to going live?
  • What are the mid-term goals for the project?
  • What is the baseline functionality needed?
    • ILS + ERM functionality
    • This needs to be ready before next summer
  • Feature prioritization will be delegated to the Capacity Planning Team
  • The feature vetting process will let the SMEs understand features, clarify descriptions, and make sure their rankings are accurate
  • The Capacity Planning Team will review and share details about what seems realistic to complete in the next year.
  • Institutions should think about priorities and timelines

Do we meet next week?

  • We will cancel – next meeting July 12
Discuss Posts of InterestKristin Martinhttps://discuss.folio.org/t/erm-review-process-action-record/2479
SIG Jira review: focus on AcquisitionsDennis Bridges

Features targeted for Q3 release: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1KVq1Tev9Y0q7YXLLI8vJFDXmEbL2YYpzqrg4ItDsBvU/edit#gid=0

  • This list was exported before the F2F, so some features have been updated in Jira
  • PO rankings
    • These have primarily been used to sort the list – a high number doesn't necessarily mean a high importance
    • We're not totally sure how these were calculated
    • The decimal places were just added to differentiate features that had the same rank.
  • Institution rankings are based on points – e.g., 10 points for go-live – but we don't think this is the "Original Rank" number in the spreadsheet.
  • FY Rollover has been pushed out of Q3 release, because we need underlying financial structures to be completed first.
  • When is FY Rollover? GBV - Dec. 2020, Chicago - June 2021, Duke - July 2021
  • For ERM, Owen feels confident that they can deliver everything on their list by the end of the year – the bigger question will be whether something is missing.
  • Is it worth it for us to review the Acquisitions spreadsheet line by line?
    • Other SIGs are doing this and finding that they're reranking a lot
    • In many cases, go-live features will all have the same rank and we'll need to differentiate them
    • We will start looking at the list and thinking about whether features need to be clarified or broken into smaller features.
  • UXPROD-979: Create acquisitions teams
    • Needed by Chalmers and 5C, so no need to adjust
  • UXPROD-193 - Electronic checkin
    • Why is this ranked highly when it's not needed by anyone?
    • The work was mostly done for physical resources, so this is "free"
    • We suspect that the meaning of this feature is unclear. Is it check-in? Is it access verification? Is it activation in a KB?
    • Already closed anyway
  • UXPROD-1665: PO Templates
    • This issue is about being able to prepopulate the order with set values
    • Rankings are good
  • UXPROD-1687
    • Dependent on UXPROD-979
    • Rankings are good
  • UXPROD-1080 - Manage donor information
    • Use case involves storing donor codes and using them to create electronic bookplates
    • Why does this have such a high-rank with so few go-lives?
    • Q3 release was probably added a long time ago
    • It is a go-live for Chicago, but it's probably not more important than, say, serials check-in.
    • We also need to be able to use the donor codes to drive discovery – not sure if this feature covers that.

Kristin is going to reach out to Holly/Capacity Planning Team to figure out how we can make this discussion most useful for capacity planning team. The work is extensively time-consuming, but we aren't sure it is contributing to the desired outcomes for Capacity Planning.

Spreadsheet of Jira tickets in Resource Management Space (exported 6/27/2019): https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1h9TrBklLjZXgqYT1kc7vIQGsl_gcDqVt/edit#gid=61656257

...