Skip to end of banner
Go to start of banner

2020-08-27 Resource Management Meeting Notes

Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

You are viewing an old version of this page. View the current version.

Compare with Current View Page History

« Previous Version 5 Current »

Date

Attendees

Goals

Discussion items

ItemWhoNotes
Minute taker?Abigail Wickes

Announcements/updates

  • Planned revised release schedule for FOLIO from Capacity Planning Team
    • Recommendation to shift to 3 releases/year (~March/July/November) now that product has been implemented many places; implication moving Honeysuckle release to late Nov.
    • Positive feedback from Duke, hopefully more time to work on features rather than releases
  • FOLIO vision/strategy work is underway
    • Subset of Product Council + a few others; first meeting this week
  • Expense classes User Acceptance Testing
    • The feedback form is open through Tuesday—feel free to test if today’s meeting runs shorter!
Statistics Working Group
  • Forming (probably short-lived) working group to work on tracking productivity statistics
    • Many of institutions already track this using MARC (Cornell uses 948 field), but also considering Acquisitions Functions, (e.g. checking added volumes/withdrawals…) what kind of cataloging was done by individuals or in batch; goal to track this in FOLIO w/out using MARC, so RM perspective would be very helpful
    • Productivity stats useful for tracking who did what (intentionally) if questions come up, and reporting on technical services activities as a unit
      • Owen S.—individual stats handled differently in Europe w/r/t privacy issues, whereas overall reporting is more of a universal need
    • Investigate and develop short-term solutions with existing functionality and consider long-term potential solutions as well
      • Consider what is tracked automatically already vs. what is actually reported (e.g. one update to a record might be edited and saved a few times, but would only want to count overall activity as one update)
      • Julie B.—envisioning some of this tracking via Reporting-SIG; how would this group differ?
        • Laura W.—Reporting-SIG would put together requirements for report, Productivity Stats working group would ensure the data is there for reporting
      • Kristin M.—guessing metadata side of reporting will be more complex than RM, considering different levels of cataloging—lots of information should already be there
      • Lloyd comment—would this be a manual process where people choose to record the information or not?
        • Laura W—group needs to decide
      • Martina S.—not allowed to track individual productivity in EU, need to be able to opt out; currently using common log-ins with colleagues as a workaround; hope to be able to disable in future
      • Kristin M.—one purpose of tracking RM work in US is for auditing
      • Owen—concerns about introducing something new that some libraries would have to work around, but understand that some libraries would want this information; solution should be optional rather than compulsory
      • Sarah C.—would be helpful to bring up with ERM working group; often important to know whether changes were done by individual or system—added to implementer Wiki page for further discussion
      • Laura W.—RM tracking sounds less complex, but will create a space in Wiki for RM use cases which will be very helpful starting point
      • Would be good for someone under EU regulations to participate, or at least be consulted
Acquisitions updates/implementation questions?
N/A

Action items

  •  
  • No labels