Page Comparison

• Doodle the poll please; Kristin will arrange the meeting for all parties involved

Email Integration

• Goal: retaining and documenting institutional memory easily and efficiently
• Discussed some technical approaches, but Filip notes Jakub mentioned several as well; better to focus on functionality than potential tech solutions here
• Martina raised the issue of needing to cover multiple titles/packages with single communication threads
• Filip noted potential for move/copy/continue functions
• May be appropriate for later versions, but Filip wants to be sure data storage and other structural decisions do not preclude subsequent required capabilities
• Filip would like examples of use cases (see action items)

Support System

• New element: “submit request” UI
• To what extent should this integrate with existing CRM systems?
• Multiple use cases described across all institutions; much variety
• Conclusions: Basic CRM functionality within FOLIO seems sensible; How that might work needs more in-depth investigation to identify for Filip the most important points, especially with respect to versioning. (see action items)

Selection & Purchase Requests

• Much of this functionality is out of scope for the RM SIG; proposed creation of a Selection SIG (see action items)
• Bill suggested added functionality, optional features such as donate an item or fund a purchase
• Kim suggested changing “request” (which is generally used in other library functions) to “suggest” (as in “Suggest a Purchase”)
• Eric noted desirability of desiderata/wish list functions

Orders

• In lower right pane, add functionality for:
  • Change fund code
  • Split among multiple funds
• Order types are not represented (firm/serial/continuations or standing orders, etc.)
• Keep in mind otype assignments are “automated” in the sense that they are derived from load routines and other interactions with vendors
• Need material type codes as well
• See action items for list production and further discussion

Finances

• Discussion covered many fund management models; conclusions:
  • System must be flexible and support multiple models
  • Agreement that we’ll need funds, tags, and possibly hierarchical structures
• Prepare to revisit this topic next week (see agenda items)

Lynn's query on the status of prototype for April ER&L Open House

• Filip wants to cover Consortia and Demand Driven Acquisition over the next two weeks
• Filip’s working with Harry on Consortia
• Several noted that if we cover acquisitions basics, the building blocks for DDA will likely be in place

Agenda items for 10 March:

• Review Ann-Marie’s and Virginia’s lists of order types/material types
• Revisit fund structures, review pros/cons of each