2021-11-02 Acquisitions Meeting notes

• Take a look in slack for some variations on how to show information icons. Cast a vote for your preference. 

• Bulk create pieces - previous conversation, group does not really want to bulk upload from a file. 
• From Lloyd (Marmot Library Network) to Everyone 12:14 PM We might want to create pieces in bulk for migration, if not normal operation.
• Key things identified as high value
  • Ability to have guidance when creating piece. So if last piece received was v.1, no.1, 2021, then the next is v.1, no.2, 2021
  • Notifications
• Major problem to add pieces now is that it is slow. 
• Without getting into publication patterns yet, here are some suggested improvements. 
  • Create multiple pieces in a row,
    • Allow user to toggle “Create another” so they can add multiple pieces without all the clicks. 
    • When we reload the form, we carry over the fields. 
  • Both save and receive become primary buttons as they will allow user to dismiss current piece and create the next
  • When creating multiple pieces in a row the information will carry forward from the previously created piece
• Dung-Lan: I think being able to create multiple pieces this way. Would like it if the expected receive date can be automatically updated to 30 days (or whatever the time frame is). 
• From Adam Hudnut-Beumler to Everyone 12:23 PM
  At Duke, we still receive so many weeklies that this amount of manual entry would be much less efficient than our current system
  If this was the only way, the expected receipt date updating feature would certainly be necessary
• Ann-Marie: Piece is an acquisitions entity that doesn't exist in inventory.  Item records are inventory entities that don't exist in the orders. They kind of interact with each other, but are different records. There is not necessarily a 1 to 1 between item and piece, although there often is. 
• From Julie Brannon (she/her) to Everyone 12:31 PM
  Might help to have a duplicate warning
  From Jackie Magagnosc to Everyone 12:33 PM
  And you get the same behavior in Inventory when you duplicate Holdings or Items, so it's consistent behavior across the system
  From Shyama Agrawal to Everyone 12:33 PM
  At Law library we frequently use 'Duplicate" for items that can't be predicted; like replacement volumes for codes.  Sometimes we have multiple components coming at different intervals.
  From Adam Hudnut-Beumler to Everyone 12:34 PM
  Ditto the usefulness of a duplicate feature for received items. Supplemental issues are not always "expected."
  Step in the right direction, definitely.
  

Notifications

1. Dennis: The other thing that stood out was notifications: Basically just telling user the issue is overdue. 
   • We don't have a way to notify a specific user
   • We do have a mechanism for alerts 
   • Alter when expected receipt date has elapsed
   • If the expected receipt date has elapsed based on the Organization “expected receipt interval” an alert is show on POL
   • Would you want to filter by alert at the order level, or in the receiving app itself?
   • Ann-Marie: This is either the first piece to start thinking of claiming, or a preliminary feature that gets us ready to talk about claiming in the future. 
   • Julie Stauffer: Where would it display? If you were working thorough subscription invoices, would you see it as part of processing invoices? Or only in a direct search? What is the intent?
   • Ann-Marie: We have order line, receiving information, invoice line... 
   • Dennis: In the receiving area, in theory, we have a mechanism to produce these things by using the filter. 

• • From Lisa G Smith to Everyone 12:36 PM
    Could we filter by alert?
  • From Sara Colglazier (MHC/5C) to Everyone 12:37 PM
    +1 re filter by alert or some sort of push notice. ERM dashboard tie in??
  • From Martina Schildt to Everyone 12:38 PM filter by overdue date and display on Dashboard
    +1 Sara :)
  • From Lisa G Smith to Everyone 12:38 PM
    If we had a way to bring these records together, it would be helpful.  Either in orders or receiving.
  • From Sara Colglazier (MHC/5C) to Everyone 12:39 PM
    I would take an email for an alert, if that is easiest to start
  • From Scott Stangroom to Everyone 12:40 PM
    Could you write the “claim” or not received item to a report that could be run monthly and ad hoc?
  • From Adam Hudnut-Beumler to Everyone 12:40 PM +1 Scott & Lisa
  • Sara C: There is a bit of danger to conflate the invoice issue with the claiming issue. 
  • Dennis: Summary: It would be valuable to know when the time has elapsed, But how to alert users, and what we consider elapsed, gets us into conversations about other functionalities. 
  • From Sara Colglazier (MHC/5C) to Everyone 12:49 PM
    frequency and claim period 

• Need your reactions to this pattern
• In the organization record, there is an accordion for EDI information
• implementing the ability to send orders from folio to other systems via edi. 
• Want to allow the ability for the organization to have more than one configuration. 
• Exploring having a different pattern for this information.  
•  Looking at having the user create the organization first, then add the details for the configurations afterwards. 
  • Hope is that by doing it this way, the form is less cluttered. 
  • Avoid some of the problems that have been experienced from not allowing users to edit.
• Does this change make sense you everyone?
  • We can pick this up if everyone needs time to think about this. 
  • Ann-Marie: how much do you expect that for one organization in folio that you will have more than one form needed?
  • From Peter Sbrzesny to Everyone 12:59 PM
    We would have many different library accounts
  • Dung-Lan - I wasn't sure what you were asking. For a vendor we will have different profiles under the EDI. 
  • Dennis: We are talking about how you add the details to an organization. 
  • Ann-Marie: We are not wanting to have a situation where you have to have a vendor record for every account. 
  • From Adam Hudnut-Beumler to Everyone 01:01 PM
    Thanks for clarification, Dennis. I'd vote the latter option
  • From Peter Sbrzesny to Everyone 01:01 PM
    Editing after creating would be ok
  • From Dung-Lan Chen to Everyone 01:02 PM
    +1 to Adam