Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] FW: Evergreen Acquistions vs some other method

[Donald Butterworth]

At Asbury Seminary we have been using the Acq module since we went live a
year and a half ago. For the most part, it handles Firm Orders correctly.
It is not designed to handle Standing Orders, e.g. Periodicals, Serials,
Monographic series, and Blanket orders. To handle these types of orders we
have to get "creative" and treat them like a monograph, or keep an outside
record on a spreadsheet.

Here is what our workflow looks like in case anyone is interested.

Electronic "candidate" records are compiled into the freeware JTacq
.
JTacq checks Evergreen and identifies titles we already own.
JTacq searches for the vendor with the cheapest price.
Copy/Item record data is attached to each title through the use of
"profiles"
JTacq puts titles to be ordered from Amazon and ABEBooks directly into
their checkout carts.
JTacq pulls the permanent Bib record from OCLC.
JTacq deletes "junk" fields from the bib records.
JTacq applies a 962 field to each bib record based on the linked profile.

Bib Records are exported to a file to be imported into Evergreen. The "Load
MARC Order Records" feature is then used to create a Purchase Order, add
the permanent Bib record to the database and add Copy/Item records to the
database all in one fell swoop. Very Cool.

The only flaw in this procedure is you CANNOT have multiple 962 fields with
different purchase prices. So if volume 1 costs $50 and volume 2 costs $75
you are out of luck.

Because all of the cataloging work is done up front, with the permanent
MARC record used to create the order, receiving volumes is a snap. It takes
very little time to get volumes/items on the shelf.

Another annoyance is the "Acquisition Search" screen grid. Only 15 lines
are displayed on this screen, newest to oldest. To date we have 155 orders
with Amazon, which means we have to hit the "Next" button 11 times just to
get to the most recent order. I hate to think how many times we will need
to hit "Next" 3 years from now.

With those two caveats we are pleased with Firm Orders.

(But don't get me started on Electronic Invoicing with EBSCO)

Don


On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 4:08 PM, Elisabeth Keppler 
wrote:

> Forsyth County NC used to use the Evergreen acquisitions module, but
> because the County would not allow us to track money that way (we are
> required to use the County Finance Department's methods), it was much more
> trouble than it was worth.  We were tracking in multiple places.  Now, once
> the PO is activated, the money people track the funds and Tech Services
> tracks the materials.  That's an over-simplification, of course, but it
> means there's a lot less duplication of effort.
>
> Best of luck!
> Lise
>
> On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 3:58 PM, St. John, Leslie <
> lstj...@georgialibraries.org> wrote:
>
>> Hi Sharon,
>> We (I) empathize.  Sincerely.  It's not easy. We use all of it, or try.
>> We've learned a lot and keep on learning.
>>
>> In our consortium we currently have three library systems using
>> Acquisitions. The systems are different in size, budget, workflows and
>> vendors. Each encounters different issues.  When we go into a library
>> system that wants to use Acquisitions we ask about their goals and then
>> later, after they have had some experience we go back and ask if the EG
>> Acquisitions has or will meet their goals and they all have said yes.  They
>> are most excited about fund tracking - that they know how their budgets
>> stand in real time; second is they are happily relieved of most of their
>> paper.  Although we tend to have very strict audit requirements that still
>> require paper purchase orders and invoices their pre-order tracking,
>> collating and receiving are almost paper free. One of our library systems
>> that tried and rejected Acquisitions is now extremely interested - the
>> person who rejected it is now in charge of the entire process of acquiring
>> and cataloging for a large system. They now appreciate the advantages of a
>> cohesive Acquisitions module over their cobbled together vendor website and
>> internal spreadsheet system they have been using.
>>
>> I do not know of any of our library systems using any Acquisitions
>> specific software. Most systems seem to use a combination of ordering
>> through through their vendor websites and issuing paper purchase orders,
>> keeping track of their funds though spreadsheets.  Some of our larger
>> systems have constructed in-house databases to manage ordering but not fund
>> tracking.
>>
>> I hope that helps you out some. Please feel free to contact me if you
>> have further questions or if we can be of any help to you.
>> Leslie
>>
>> Leslie St. John
>> PINES Consultant
>> Georgia Public Library Service
>> A Unit of the University System of Georgia
>> 1800 Century Place, Suite 150
>> Atlanta, GA 30345-4304
>> 404-235-7129
>> lstj...@georgialibraries.org
>> www.gapines.org
>>
>> --
>> *From: *"Sharon Douglas" 

Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] In-Process items, centralized cataloging, filling random holds, not in Best Hold Selection order

[Josh Stompro]

Elaine,

Thanks for all the feedback.  It has helped me work though the options.  We do 
have a test system that we can try things out on, once I get it updated with a 
more recent copy of our production system.

Here is a summary of what I think our options are.


1.   Manually route in-progress items to the assigned locations.  Poses 
problems for us because we use floating and don't have a physical indication on 
the copy of where it initially needs to go.  If we did have a custom barcode 
label that specifies which location it goes to, or something similar this would 
work ok. There is a chance that an item would get to its home location and 
immediately get sent back to fill a hold at another location.  Watching for 
those situations would again take more manual checking.  We would rather have 
the system take care of it.

2.   Use top of queue/cut in line to force the new copies to fill the holds 
at the locations that we want the initial copies to go to.

a.   Pro: Items get to the initial locations they need to be at.

b.  Pro: Items wouldn't go somewhere just to be checked in and go back in 
transit to another location.

c.   Cons: Extra work to change the holds.

d.  Cons: Depending on how long of a time period passes between setting the 
Cut-in line for the holds and the copies getting processed

e.  Cons: Depending on the order that the copies are checked in, the item 
owning/circ lib won't match up with which hold they are going to fill.  This 
would make the catalog display confusing until all the holds are filled and 
items start floating at reshelving time.

I can think of a couple enhancements that would make this process smoother for 
us.  If anyone else is interested in something along these lines let me know so 
we can coordinate.

New Development/New Features

* A new checkin modifier that would force the use of the workstations 
org unit best hold selection sort order.  This would allow our cataloging 
stations to force a home proximity based sort, so the copies would 
automatically start filling holds at their assigned home libraries first.  If 
there are no holds at the home location then the oldest hold based on the 
normal proximity would take effect.  I can see this feature helping out other 
organizations.  It seems like a way to override the best hold selection sort 
based on physical location could be useful in other situations.  I don't know 
how feasible this would be to create.  Maybe it would be easy to just modify 
the copy object higher in the stack to change the owning lib for that copy just 
for the checkin.

* A new checkin modifier that would suppress holds but allow transits, 
so items would be routed to their home locations to start with and would start 
filling holds once they get there.  This would potentially send copies out to a 
location that has no local holds, so the item would immediately go back into 
transit, wasting time in transit.  So I think this option is less desirable 
than the first one.  But since there is already a suppress holds and transits 
checkin mod feature, there is more of a chance that I could figure out how to 
create this.

Josh Stompro - LARL IT Director

From: Open-ils-general 
[mailto:open-ils-general-boun...@list.georgialibraries.org] On Behalf Of Hardy, 
Elaine
Sent: Friday, November 06, 2015 9:13 AM
To: Evergreen Discussion Group
Subject: Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] In-Process items, centralized cataloging, 
filling random holds, not in Best Hold Selection order

Josh,

A floating collection would certainly change how you would handle items. No 
PINES library has a floating collections at this point, so I am not sure I can 
answer your questions since we don't have experience with it. I can tell you 
that, with PINES holds configuration, there is no guarantee after the 6 months 
hold protection is over that a location's item will fill a location's holds. It 
isn't unusual for Org Unit A's item to fill holds at OU B while OU B's item is 
filling holds at another OU. It is one of those things that annoys PINES staff 
but it does prevent an item from criss-crissing the state and spending too much 
time in transit as a result.

One downside to having all copies owned by one OU would be sorting copies 
amongst locations if you did ever stop floating your collection.

Consider, if you have a test server to set up holds testing/tracking and see 
what  happens under different scenarios that you know you encounter. If you 
don't have a test server,  I suggest you monitor and track how holds are 
functioning for a specific period of time. Whichever method you use, evaluate 
your workflow and settings based on your findings.  It may take time and cause 
for headaches along the  way; but, in the end you will have a practical 
understanding of how holds are functioning under your policies and workflows 
and will be better able to make any adjustments to either you need.

Elaine

J. Elaine Hardy
PINES & 

Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] In-Process items, centralized cataloging, filling random holds, not in Best Hold Selection order

[Hardy, Elaine]

Josh,

 

If you are a consortium with  a floating  collection, and no property
designation on the item, does it matter which copy fills which hold as
long as the hold gets filled? 

 

 

 

Elaine

 

J. Elaine Hardy
PINES & Collaborative Projects Manager
Georgia Public Library Service
1800 Century Place, Ste 150
Atlanta, Ga. 30345-4304

 

404.235.7128
404.235.7201, fax
eha...@georgialibraries.org
www.georgialibraries.org
www.georgialibraries.org/pines

 

From: Open-ils-general
[mailto:open-ils-general-boun...@list.georgialibraries.org] On Behalf Of
Josh Stompro
Sent: Friday, November 6, 2015 3:03 PM
To: Evergreen Discussion Group

Subject: Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] In-Process items, centralized cataloging,
filling random holds, not in Best Hold Selection order

 

Elaine,

 

Thanks for all the feedback.  It has helped me work though the options.
We do have a test system that we can try things out on, once I get it
updated with a more recent copy of our production system.   

 

Here is a summary of what I think our options are.

 

1.   Manually route in-progress items to the assigned locations.
Poses problems for us because we use floating and don't have a physical
indication on the copy of where it initially needs to go.  If we did have
a custom barcode label that specifies which location it goes to, or
something similar this would work ok. There is a chance that an item would
get to its home location and immediately get sent back to fill a hold at
another location.  Watching for those situations would again take more
manual checking.  We would rather have the system take care of it.

2.   Use top of queue/cut in line to force the new copies to fill the
holds at the locations that we want the initial copies to go to.

a.   Pro: Items get to the initial locations they need to be at.

b.  Pro: Items wouldn't go somewhere just to be checked in and go back
in transit to another location.

c.   Cons: Extra work to change the holds.

d.  Cons: Depending on how long of a time period passes between
setting the Cut-in line for the holds and the copies getting processed 

e.   Cons: Depending on the order that the copies are checked in, the
item owning/circ lib won't match up with which hold they are going to
fill.  This would make the catalog display confusing until all the holds
are filled and items start floating at reshelving time.

 

I can think of a couple enhancements that would make this process smoother
for us.  If anyone else is interested in something along these lines let
me know so we can coordinate.

 

New Development/New Features

*   A new checkin modifier that would force the use of the
workstations org unit best hold selection sort order.  This would allow
our cataloging stations to force a home proximity based sort, so the
copies would automatically start filling holds at their assigned home
libraries first.  If there are no holds at the home location then the
oldest hold based on the normal proximity would take effect.  I can see
this feature helping out other organizations.  It seems like a way to
override the best hold selection sort based on physical location could be
useful in other situations.  I don't know how feasible this would be to
create.  Maybe it would be easy to just modify the copy object higher in
the stack to change the owning lib for that copy just for the checkin.

*   A new checkin modifier that would suppress holds but allow
transits, so items would be routed to their home locations to start with
and would start filling holds once they get there.  This would potentially
send copies out to a location that has no local holds, so the item would
immediately go back into transit, wasting time in transit.  So I think
this option is less desirable than the first one.  But since there is
already a suppress holds and transits checkin mod feature, there is more
of a chance that I could figure out how to create this.

 

Josh Stompro - LARL IT Director

 

From: Open-ils-general
[mailto:open-ils-general-boun...@list.georgialibraries.org] On Behalf Of
Hardy, Elaine
Sent: Friday, November 06, 2015 9:13 AM
To: Evergreen Discussion Group
Subject: Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] In-Process items, centralized cataloging,
filling random holds, not in Best Hold Selection order

 

Josh,

 

A floating collection would certainly change how you would handle items.
No PINES library has a floating collections at this point, so I am not
sure I can answer your questions since we don't have experience with it. I
can tell you that, with PINES holds configuration, there is no guarantee
after the 6 months hold protection is over that a location's item will
fill a location's holds. It isn't unusual for Org Unit A's item to fill
holds at OU B while OU B's item is filling holds at another OU. It is one
of those things that annoys PINES staff but it does prevent an item from
criss-crissing the state and spending too much time in 

[OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Job Announcement: Technology Specialist/System Administration (Columbus, OH)

[Matt Polcyn]

**Please excuse cross-posting**



Technology Specialist/System Administration

OhioNET

Columbus, OH



OhioNET, a not-for-profit library service organization, is looking for a 
qualified individual with a background in library systems administration to 
fill its open Technology Specialist position.



SUMMARY



As part of OhioNET's technology services support team, this individual will:



* Administer hardware, operating systems and/or related network 
infrastructure for OhioNET-managed library systems (currently three physical 
servers co-located in external data center and two virtual servers on managed 
infrastructure)

* Assist in the support and administration of library applications and 
other components of OhioNET-managed systems, which include multiple shared 
integrated library systems and proxy servers.

* Provide front-line technical support to member libraries and their 
staff to support their effective use of those systems and services.

* Assist in the identification, investigation, development and 
implementation of technology-related services and solutions that support the 
needs of OHIONET member libraries and groups.



KEY RESPONSIBILITIES



In consultation with other OhioNET staff, position will:



1.   Oversee all aspects of system administration and 
management for all OhioNET -managed systems/servers including:

a.   Innovative Interfaces Sierra servers for the OPAL (Ohio 
Private Academic Libraries) consortium;

b.   Innovative Interfaces Millennium server for the OSLS/OHNT2 
program;

c.   EZproxy servers used by several OhioNET members and the 
OPAL consortium.

2.   Assist with the on-going maintenance and end-user support 
for OhioNET -managed library systems, with primary focus on the COOL consortium 
(Consortium of Ohio Libraries) and its Evergreen library management system and 
EZproxy servers and, as needed, other shared library systems.

3.   Provide support via email, telephone and fax to 
individuals with varying levels of technical expertise.

4.   Utilize programming, technical and troubleshooting skills 
in operating hardware and software employed by the various OhioNET projects and 
member libraries.

5.   Coordinate system service, maintenance, updates and/or 
replacement with other OhioNET staff, participating libraries, vendor 
representatives and consultants.

6.   Prepare complete and accurate documentation to support 
systems and projects.

7.   Participate in after-hours and weekend emergency support 
rotation.

8.   Serve as backup for other departmental staff when 
applicable.

9.   Travel and attend meetings as needed to support OHIONET 
projects.

10.   Perform other duties, as assigned.



QUALIFICATIONS



Knowledge/Experience:

* Minimum of one year of experience in system administration and 
support required;

* Experience with Linux system administration required;

* Experience with library management applications/systems (library 
service platforms/ILS, discovery systems, etc.) required;

* Familiarity with at least one programming/scripting language;

* Knowledge of relational databases (MySQL, PostgreSQL or similar) and 
SQL fundamentals;



Skills:

* Outstanding problem-solving skills;

* Ability to prioritize among multiple projects;

* Demonstrated troubleshooting skills;

* Strong public or customer service skills;

* Excellent written and oral communication skills;

* Project management and coordination skills

* Capability of exercising sound judgment;



Abilities:

* Identify and assess problems, investigate multiple solutions and 
recommend appropriate solutions;

* Explain technical issues or provide technical instruction to 
individuals with diverse technological proficiency;

* Work independently and with minimal supervision;



Compensation and benefits include:



* Salary commensurate with qualifications and experience;

* Twenty vacation days, 12 days sick leave and 11 paid holidays;

* TIAA-CREF retirement plan;

* Generous healthcare, dental and vision coverage;



Interested applicants should send a letter of application, resume, and three 
references with addresses and phone numbers to:



Jennifer Turner, (jennif...@ohionet.org)

Director of Administrative Services

OhioNET

1500 W. Lane Ave.

Columbus OH 43221



Electronic submissions are acceptable.  Applications received by December 1 
will receive first consideration.



---

MATT POLCYN

Director, Technology Services

OhioNET

1500 W Lane Ave | Columbus, OH  43221

t 614-486-2966 ext 27 | f 614-484-1061

e 

Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] FW: Evergreen Acquistions vs some other method

[Morgan, Christine]

Hi Sharon,

We are a consortium of 28 libraries. We have 12 libraries currently using
EG Acquisitions and 2 libraries using MARC Batch Import to load on order
bibs and items into the catalog. The workflows for our acquisitions
libraries vary greatly depending on staffing and need. Many of our
libraries use EDI. Some do not. We have some libraries where one person
does everything and others where the ordering, receiving, invoicing, and
cataloging are split up among staff.

The 2 libraries we have using MARC Batch Import used acquisitions
previously and dropped it because they did not need the fund accounting.
They load bibs and on order items from Baker & Taylor, Ingram, and MidWest
currently.

Our libraries that do not use acquisitions use Excel and/or their town or
institution accounting system.

We were early adopters of EG Acquisitions and it has come a long way since
it's beginnings. There are still things that need improvement but our
libraries have settled in and are happy with it.

Hope this helps!
Christine

On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 8:27 AM, Donald Butterworth <
don.butterwo...@asburyseminary.edu> wrote:

> At Asbury Seminary we have been using the Acq module since we went live a
> year and a half ago. For the most part, it handles Firm Orders correctly.
> It is not designed to handle Standing Orders, e.g. Periodicals, Serials,
> Monographic series, and Blanket orders. To handle these types of orders we
> have to get "creative" and treat them like a monograph, or keep an outside
> record on a spreadsheet.
>
> Here is what our workflow looks like in case anyone is interested.
>
> Electronic "candidate" records are compiled into the freeware JTacq
> .
> JTacq checks Evergreen and identifies titles we already own.
> JTacq searches for the vendor with the cheapest price.
> Copy/Item record data is attached to each title through the use of
> "profiles"
> JTacq puts titles to be ordered from Amazon and ABEBooks directly into
> their checkout carts.
> JTacq pulls the permanent Bib record from OCLC.
> JTacq deletes "junk" fields from the bib records.
> JTacq applies a 962 field to each bib record based on the linked profile.
>
> Bib Records are exported to a file to be imported into Evergreen. The
> "Load MARC Order Records" feature is then used to create a Purchase Order,
> add the permanent Bib record to the database and add Copy/Item records to
> the database all in one fell swoop. Very Cool.
>
> The only flaw in this procedure is you CANNOT have multiple 962 fields
> with different purchase prices. So if volume 1 costs $50 and volume 2 costs
> $75 you are out of luck.
>
> Because all of the cataloging work is done up front, with the permanent
> MARC record used to create the order, receiving volumes is a snap. It takes
> very little time to get volumes/items on the shelf.
>
> Another annoyance is the "Acquisition Search" screen grid. Only 15 lines
> are displayed on this screen, newest to oldest. To date we have 155 orders
> with Amazon, which means we have to hit the "Next" button 11 times just to
> get to the most recent order. I hate to think how many times we will need
> to hit "Next" 3 years from now.
>
> With those two caveats we are pleased with Firm Orders.
>
> (But don't get me started on Electronic Invoicing with EBSCO)
>
> Don
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 4:08 PM, Elisabeth Keppler 
> wrote:
>
>> Forsyth County NC used to use the Evergreen acquisitions module, but
>> because the County would not allow us to track money that way (we are
>> required to use the County Finance Department's methods), it was much more
>> trouble than it was worth.  We were tracking in multiple places.  Now, once
>> the PO is activated, the money people track the funds and Tech Services
>> tracks the materials.  That's an over-simplification, of course, but it
>> means there's a lot less duplication of effort.
>>
>> Best of luck!
>> Lise
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 3:58 PM, St. John, Leslie <
>> lstj...@georgialibraries.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Sharon,
>>> We (I) empathize.  Sincerely.  It's not easy. We use all of it, or try.
>>> We've learned a lot and keep on learning.
>>>
>>> In our consortium we currently have three library systems using
>>> Acquisitions. The systems are different in size, budget, workflows and
>>> vendors. Each encounters different issues.  When we go into a library
>>> system that wants to use Acquisitions we ask about their goals and then
>>> later, after they have had some experience we go back and ask if the EG
>>> Acquisitions has or will meet their goals and they all have said yes.  They
>>> are most excited about fund tracking - that they know how their budgets
>>> stand in real time; second is they are happily relieved of most of their
>>> paper.  Although we tend to have very strict audit requirements that still
>>> require paper purchase orders and invoices their pre-order tracking,
>>> collating and receiving are almost paper 

Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] In-Process items, centralized cataloging, filling random holds, not in Best Hold Selection order

[Hardy, Elaine]

Josh,

 

A floating collection would certainly change how you would handle items.
No PINES library has a floating collections at this point, so I am not
sure I can answer your questions since we don't have experience with it. I
can tell you that, with PINES holds configuration, there is no guarantee
after the 6 months hold protection is over that a location's item will
fill a location's holds. It isn't unusual for Org Unit A's item to fill
holds at OU B while OU B's item is filling holds at another OU. It is one
of those things that annoys PINES staff but it does prevent an item from
criss-crissing the state and spending too much time in transit as a
result.

 

One downside to having all copies owned by one OU would be sorting copies
amongst locations if you did ever stop floating your collection. 

 

Consider, if you have a test server to set up holds testing/tracking and
see what  happens under different scenarios that you know you encounter.
If you don't have a test server,  I suggest you monitor and track how
holds are functioning for a specific period of time. Whichever method you
use, evaluate your workflow and settings based on your findings.  It may
take time and cause for headaches along the  way; but, in the end you will
have a practical understanding of how holds are functioning under your
policies and workflows and will be better able to make any adjustments to
either you need.

 

Elaine

 

J. Elaine Hardy
PINES & Collaborative Projects Manager
Georgia Public Library Service
1800 Century Place, Ste 150
Atlanta, Ga. 30345-4304

 

404.235.7128
404.235.7201, fax
eha...@georgialibraries.org
www.georgialibraries.org
www.georgialibraries.org/pines

 

From: Open-ils-general
[mailto:open-ils-general-boun...@list.georgialibraries.org] On Behalf Of
Josh Stompro
Sent: Thursday, November 5, 2015 4:44 PM
To: Evergreen Discussion Group

Subject: Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] In-Process items, centralized cataloging,
filling random holds, not in Best Hold Selection order

 

Elaine, We just tried to work though how it would work to send items out
without checking them in and I don't think we can make it work.  There is
nothing on the items themselves that say which branch they go to, so we
cannot simple look at the item to know where to send it.  We float
everything so we don't need that info on the item.

 

So someone would need to look up the info on each item and manually
add/create a routing slip at that point, which is quite a bit more work
than just checking stuff in and printing a slip.

 

What I think might work for us is that when our Collections Dev librarian
decides where the copies are initially allocated based on the holds, she
can select the first X number of holds (where X = number of copies) for
the locations where the items are going to be assigned, and use top of
queue/cut in line to set those holds to be filled first.  Then when the
items are checked in , they will fill those holds first and go to the
correct locations.  It might make the catalog look a little strange, since
there is no guarantee that location A's item will be filling location A's
holds, unless we are really good about checking in the items in the right
order.

 

Now I'm wondering if we can use floating to skip the volume creation step
for each owning location?  Is there a downside to having all the items at
one owning location with all the copies having different circulation
library locations?

 

Josh Stompro - LARL IT Director

 

From: Open-ils-general
[mailto:open-ils-general-boun...@list.georgialibraries.org] On Behalf Of
Josh Stompro
Sent: Thursday, November 05, 2015 2:03 PM
To: Evergreen Discussion Group
Subject: Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] In-Process items, centralized cataloging,
filling random holds, not in Best Hold Selection order

 

Thanks Elaine,   I found out that the issue I was having with the specific
title that seemed to fill the wrong hold was because our migrated holds
all had a selection_depth of 1, and holds placed post migration have a
selection depth of 0.  We had the selection depth included in our Best
Hold Selection Sort order, which was sorting the holds based on that,
which was prioritizing the holds with a depth of 0.  So the system was
working exactly like it should, it just took me a while to figure it why.

 

I think the problem with checking in as a workstation for each location is
that then the items would immediately fill holds and go onto the
holdshelf.  Notifying the patron that the item is ready, when it is really
in transit.  Maybe the capture local holds as transits checking mod would
help with that.

 

I wish there was a checkin mod like the Suppress Holds and Transit that
was just suppresses holds, which would just place the items in transit
back to their circ lib.

 

We will try just sending the items without a transit, and see how that
works out.  Thanks for the info.

 

Josh Stompro - LARL IT Director

 

From: Open-ils-general

Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] In-Process items, centralized cataloging, filling random holds, not in Best Hold Selection order

[Morgan, Michele]

Hi Josh,

One thing you could try is to add the new items with a non-holdable
status. Then you can check them in and they will be set in transit to
their circ library rather than being captured for any holds. I'm not
sure exactly what will happen when they're received at their circ
library. It might take two checkins with the Retarget checkin
modifiers turned on to capture the holds at that point.

Another thing you could try is, after adding the copies centrally,
view the holds on the bib, and select and manually retarget the oldest
(or all) of the holds on the bib from there. If you do this prior to
checking the items in, they should be properly targeted. Then you can
check them in and send them on their way to fill their holds.

As far as development, some is definitely needed to address this type
of situation. I'd like to see the hold targeting for newly added items
moved to a background process rather than forcing a retarget at
checkin. Not sure how this could be accomplished, but if, for example,
creating a new item could initiate a retarget of holds that item could
possibly fill, it could eliminate a lot of problems like this.

Hope this is helpful,
Michele
--
Michele M. Morgan, Technical Assistant
North of Boston Library Exchange, Danvers Massachusetts
mmor...@noblenet.org



On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 3:39 PM, Hardy, Elaine
 wrote:
> Josh,
>
>
>
> If you are a consortium with  a floating  collection, and no property
> designation on the item, does it matter which copy fills which hold as long
> as the hold gets filled?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Elaine
>
>
>
> J. Elaine Hardy
> PINES & Collaborative Projects Manager
> Georgia Public Library Service
> 1800 Century Place, Ste 150
> Atlanta, Ga. 30345-4304
>
>
>
> 404.235.7128
> 404.235.7201, fax
> eha...@georgialibraries.org
> www.georgialibraries.org
> www.georgialibraries.org/pines
>
>
>
> From: Open-ils-general
> [mailto:open-ils-general-boun...@list.georgialibraries.org] On Behalf Of
> Josh Stompro
> Sent: Friday, November 6, 2015 3:03 PM
>
>
> To: Evergreen Discussion Group 
> Subject: Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] In-Process items, centralized cataloging,
> filling random holds, not in Best Hold Selection order
>
>
>
> Elaine,
>
>
>
> Thanks for all the feedback.  It has helped me work though the options.  We
> do have a test system that we can try things out on, once I get it updated
> with a more recent copy of our production system.
>
>
>
> Here is a summary of what I think our options are.
>
>
>
> 1.   Manually route in-progress items to the assigned locations.  Poses
> problems for us because we use floating and don’t have a physical indication
> on the copy of where it initially needs to go.  If we did have a custom
> barcode label that specifies which location it goes to, or something similar
> this would work ok. There is a chance that an item would get to its home
> location and immediately get sent back to fill a hold at another location.
> Watching for those situations would again take more manual checking.  We
> would rather have the system take care of it.
>
> 2.   Use top of queue/cut in line to force the new copies to fill the
> holds at the locations that we want the initial copies to go to.
>
> a.   Pro: Items get to the initial locations they need to be at.
>
> b.  Pro: Items wouldn’t go somewhere just to be checked in and go back
> in transit to another location.
>
> c.   Cons: Extra work to change the holds.
>
> d.  Cons: Depending on how long of a time period passes between setting
> the Cut-in line for the holds and the copies getting processed
>
> e.   Cons: Depending on the order that the copies are checked in, the
> item owning/circ lib won’t match up with which hold they are going to fill.
> This would make the catalog display confusing until all the holds are filled
> and items start floating at reshelving time.
>
>
>
> I can think of a couple enhancements that would make this process smoother
> for us.  If anyone else is interested in something along these lines let me
> know so we can coordinate.
>
>
>
> New Development/New Features
>
> ·   A new checkin modifier that would force the use of the workstations
> org unit best hold selection sort order.  This would allow our cataloging
> stations to force a home proximity based sort, so the copies would
> automatically start filling holds at their assigned home libraries first.
> If there are no holds at the home location then the oldest hold based on the
> normal proximity would take effect.  I can see this feature helping out
> other organizations.  It seems like a way to override the best hold
> selection sort based on physical location could be useful in other
> situations.  I don’t know how feasible this would be to create.  Maybe it
> would be easy to just modify the copy object higher in the stack to change
> the owning lib for that copy just for the checkin.
>
> ·   A new