Skip to content
Innovative Idea Exchange

ILS - Polaris

JUMP TO ANOTHER FORUM

  • Hot ideas
  • Top ideas
  • New ideas
  • My feedback

561 results found

  1. It is frustrating that Polaris allows items that have not been received to circulate. There is probably not a connection between the PO status and the item status – but it sure would be nice if there was! We recently had an incident where items were distributed to branches before having been invoiced and received. A few days later when the invoice was processed, the items were all changed to a status of In-Process, even though they had already been checked out or were in a status of Being Held. It was very difficult to correct. One solution would be…

    17 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  2. There is currently only one setting that determines how long an item needs to be overdue before it reaches billed status and charges the patron for the cost of the item.

    We would like to have different types of material reach billed status at shorter intervals. For example, we would like for a device that checks out for 4 hours to be billed on the patron record after 1 day, rather than the 63 day interval that we use for standard material. Similarly, we would like our hotspots to become billed after they have been overdue for 3 days.

    13 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  3. In a consortium setting or just a large, multi-branch, library system, the most efficient hold preference setting may not be the same for both sequences.

    We currently have to pick the hold preference setting that is necessary to meet our consortium’s policies in the secondary sequence, but is redundant in the primary sequence. It would improve patron experience and reduce unnecessary shipping if we could impose different settings for each of the sequences.

    8 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  4. We are part of a state-wide consortium and the holds count for titles in PowerPAC displays total number of holds for the consortium, making it look like a very long wait for a popular title. If we have purchased Advantage copies of this title, we would like the Advantage holds to display to patrons instead of consortium-wide holds.

    As an example: With the release of the Christopher Nolan movie "Oppenheimer", everyone was interested in the book that it's based on, American Prometheus. When we searched for "American Prometheus" in PowerPAC, we saw that there were 452 holds on only 10…

    12 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  5. In the patron registration form in LEAP there is a reading history checkbox. If the patron has a reading history, clearing the checkbox and saving the record deletes that reading history permanently, and there is no warning to staff about what clearing the checkbox actually does. On clearing the checkbox, please add a warning dialog that says, "This patron's reading history will be permanently deleted. Please confirm that you want to delete it." [OK][Cancel] with focus on Cancel. This way staff will have to confirm overtly that they want to delete patron data and will be less likely to make…

    34 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  6. I'm specifically looking for a great integration between the cataloging tool BTCat and Polaris.

    Libraries use tools like BTCat and Skyriver to search for new bib records and update/edit existing records. After making changes, the records currently have to be exported from the cataloging software, then imported into Polaris. These tools have the ability to "push" records into other ILS systems, skipping the need for a manual export/import of records. Adding this functionality would aid libraries in transitioning away from the Polaris desktop client (as bibliographic editing in Leap is a tedious process, at best).

    22 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We actually added an endpoint to support this integration in Polaris 7.6 (BibsPost). We've been working with BTCat to consume the endpoint in their application.


    I'm going to set this to "Planned" for now because the integration is not live with BTCat yet. But the development piece required for Polaris has been done. Please let BTCat know you are interested!!

  7. We think it would be helpful for patrons to see Waiver Requests as "Submitted" or "Pending", "Approved", and "Denied" for better understanding. See screenshot which illustrates the lack of that detail now.

    5 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  8. As Polaris currently exists (v7.3 at my library), User 1 wants to share a bibliographic record set with User 2 and User 3. In order to do this, they have to change the record set's owner from User 1 to Organization 1. But this allows all members of Organization 1 with the permissions "Cataloging Record Sets: Modify" and "Cataloging Record Sets: Delete/Undelete" to make changes to that record set. Let's say that at some point down the road, User 4 sees this bib record set owned by Organization 1 and thinks they're being helpful by updating or deleting it. They…

    30 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  9. We'd like the ability to print from the Leap Find Tool, like we can from the client Find Tool.

    33 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  10. It's great being able to bulk-add records to a record set, but it would also be helpful to be able to bulk-remove records from a record set based on either another record set, or an Excel file.

    Today in larger record sets it can be a pain to remove a medium to large amount of records. Our staff may work with 10,000+ entry record sets, and need to remove records meeting certain criteria that isn't visible in the fields when viewing a record set. This idea would give a user the flexibility to fill a separate record set based on…

    31 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  11. We have had multiple patron requests to be able to sort reading history delivered by API by latest added or by title. Currently reading history is displayed with the oldest first which results in a lot of scrolling by the user.

    15 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  12. I would like to see a history of all holds on a bib record kept with the date of activation, not just those that were cancelled. I use this information to adjust how many copies of popular authors to pre-buy by looking at how many holds were placed on an author's previous released title(s) prior to release date.

    4 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  13. Adding smaller vendors allows us to receive better discounts when we can order direct.

    5 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  14. To have the ability to choose what columns are used in record sets. This would be useful for daily inventory of items that we would need to know the due dates or other values. Currently, record sets are locked into a standard set of columns, some of which, most of us have no use for.

    Idea Value
    This would be a major time saver when analyzing inventory and statistics.

    87 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  15. Create a way to convert an Item specific (not Volume specific) hold request to a First Available request. To often staff create a hold for a patron from the Item Find Tool and create the request for that specific item which usually delays the fulfillment of that request.

    32 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  16. Our Cataloging staff frequently have to place item-level holds on multiple items from the same bib record when making updates to the collection. Currently in Leap, these holds display in the patron's account with only the title, format, and call number. From this information it is impossible to tell which specific items have been placed on hold. Including the barcode and the assigned branch of the item would make it easier to tell different item-level holds apart when the items all have the same title.

    32 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  17. Patron records have 5 UDFs and 10 Custom Data Fields – item records have none of these. As a result, many libraries end up doing some weird stuff with the Name of Piece and Temporary Shelf Location. This idea would add 10 or so custom item record fields that libraries can choose how they would like to use.

    Ideally, fields would be capable of multiple data types including freetext, Boolean, date, or numeric. In a perfect world, it could also support a drop down list like the UDFs! The fields would also be searchable in the find tool, just like…

    20 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  18. The "Recent" tab in the Leap Workform Tracker lists recently-accessed patron, item, and bibliographic records. Now that additional record types are available in Leap, it would be helpful to have additional record types listed in the "Recent" tab, including but not limited to:InvoicesPurchase OrdersRecord Sets

    Idea Value
    The "Recent" tab in the workform tracker is a helpful tool that allows staff to easily reopen records that have been recently closed. Adding additional record types to the recent tab would be helpful for all staff, especially technical services staff that are transitioning to Leap.

    67 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  19. From time to time, we have need to place all items on a record set on hold to call them in for a specific purpose. It would be great to have the ability to select all or some items within a record set and click a place hold button and then have the option to move the request for each of these items to the top of queue.

    Idea Value
    This would make functions so much faster and easier. For example, right now, I need to place item level holds on a couple dozen checked out items to inspect them…

    115 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  20. One of the key hold ups to staff embracing Leap over the staff client at our library is the need to click continue or press the enter key to generate a hold slip for EVERY item triggering a hold in bulk check in. We are a large, RFID library and these added key strokes required for processing pulled requests and book drop are a primary complaint and Leap adoption deterrent for our staff.

    27 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  • Don't see your idea?