10 results found

1. Elevated credentials do not work in Data Exchange

   If a computer is logged into the SDA with a set of credentials that do not allow access to Data Exchange, the system prompts the user to login with appropriate credentials. When the user logs in with the elevated credentials, the SDA does not function properly. The Data Exchange dropdown list is unavailable for the newly elevated user. The user has to completely log out of the SDA in order for Data Exchange to work. I believe this is a bug in the system. If elevated credentials are prompted, then the functionality should work after the login. Otherwise, do not offer the login and force the user to logout completely to complete their task.

   If a computer is logged into the SDA with a set of credentials that do not allow access to Data Exchange, the system prompts the user to login with appropriate credentials. When the user logs in with the elevated credentials, the SDA does not function properly. The Data Exchange dropdown list is unavailable for the newly elevated user. The user has to completely log out of the SDA in order for Data Exchange to work. I believe this is a bug in the system. If elevated credentials are prompted, then the functionality should work after the login. Otherwise, do not… more

   2 votes

   Vote Vote Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Vote

   We’ll send you updates on this idea

   1 comment  ·  Circulation, Access Services & Fulfillment  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   CLOSED  ·  AdminMike Dicus (Product Manager, Innovative) responded

   I'm closing this in Idea Exchange since it sounds like a bug and should be investigated by our Support team.

2. verify address subfields in patron record (SDA)

   Many libraries depend on zip/postal codes, city, prov/state metadata to make financial and library service decisions. No subfields in the address field can be verified. The postal code has some verification, but the record can be saved if that field is not entered correctly. We would like the option to make the CITY, PROV/STATE, and POSTAL CODE/ZIP data verified, and to have a description beside each "expanded" address subfield to guide staff on how to enter the data.

   Idea Value
   Libraries should be able to verify the address subfields (like the city, prov/state, and postal/ZIP code).

   Analytic tools (even Decision Center) have the potential to query very specific reports that are based on the Postal/ZIP Code, but we rely on standardized metadata for these reports. Additionally, once we find errors, it is very difficult to use Global Update to correct numerous types of errors that are possible.

   While this is considered, we like the option to add description tags for each expanded address row. If validation is not an option, at least this would guide staff on how to make decisions during the patron registration process.

   I cannot stress enough how important it is for Libraries with large geographic areas to map circulation activity trends and registrations. We can use this to determine collections, programming, promotions, hours, delivery service, branch locations, staffing etc.

   The SDA patron registration is our one chance to get our contact with the customer set up. We no longer send mail (via the post), so if our registration has data entry errors, we lose the opportunity to reach our customers.

   Related requests are here:

   https://idealab.iii.com/alwaysopen/Page/ViewIdea?ideaid=5897

   https://idealab.iii.com/alwaysopen/Page/ViewIdea?ideaid=7868

   Many libraries depend on zip/postal codes, city, prov/state metadata to make financial and library service decisions. No subfields in the address field can be verified. The postal code has some verification, but the record can be saved if that field is not entered correctly. We would like the option to make the CITY, PROV/STATE, and POSTAL CODE/ZIP data verified, and to have a description beside each "expanded" address subfield to guide staff on how to enter the data.

   Idea Value
   Libraries should be able to verify the address subfields (like the city, prov/state, and postal/ZIP code).

   Analytic tools (even Decision… more

   18 votes

   Vote Vote Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Vote

   We’ll send you updates on this idea

   2 comments  ·  Circulation, Access Services & Fulfillment  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   CLOSED  ·  AdminMike Dicus (Product Manager, Innovative) responded

   We do see the value in incorporating address verification functionality but believe that this would need to be a broader initiative that takes LX Admin and Polaris into consideration.

   I will archive this idea for future reference and it may be re-considered for a future release.

3. Better differentiation in holds checkout warning messages

   Currently, the Sierra message that you're checking out a book that's on the holds shelf for someone else is almost identical to the message that someone has a hold on the title at a bib level, and it is extremely easy for harried, hurried staff to skip right over the more important message, that they're accidentally checking out the book to the wrong person, because they think that the message is not important. I would like a way to either differentiate those two messages in Sierra to be more clear, or to eliminate the message that says the book has a hold on it somewhere in the network.

   Idea Value
   This would help prevent checking out books on hold to the wrong patron, thus frustrating the patron whose holds have disappeared from the holds shelf. It would also help prevent staff from checking out holds to the wrong patron.

   Currently, the Sierra message that you're checking out a book that's on the holds shelf for someone else is almost identical to the message that someone has a hold on the title at a bib level, and it is extremely easy for harried, hurried staff to skip right over the more important message, that they're accidentally checking out the book to the wrong person, because they think that the message is not important. I would like a way to either differentiate those two messages in Sierra to be more clear, or to eliminate the message that says the book has… more

   •  

   •  

   20 votes

   Vote Vote Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Vote

   We’ll send you updates on this idea

   3 comments  ·  Circulation, Access Services & Fulfillment  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   CLOSED  ·  AdminMike Dicus (Product Manager, Innovative) responded

   In accordance with the Idea Graduation Workflow guidelines agreed upon by Innovative and IUG, this idea has been closed because it was submitted more than two years ago and has not been selected for inclusion in the product.

   
   

   This idea is still available for commenting but is no longer eligible for voting.

   
   

   Ideas that were submitted three or more years ago are archived for future reference.

4. Remember patron preference about receipts

   This is connected to Paul Costa's idea "Check for Due Slip Delivery Method Change Before Closing Patron Record" (link). Many patrons, probably most, have a consistent preference about receipts -- either they almost always want one printed or they almost always don't. (Or prefer to have it emailed.)

   What if we had a field in the patron record that recorded this preference, and when the patron record was opened for checkouts, the print receipt button defaulted to the patron's preference?

   The field would default to "no receipt" when the patron record was created. I'd want input from others on whether it should have to be changed manually by staff editing the record, or should be automatically updated by remembering how the button was set when the account was last closed ... also whether it ought to be visible & configurable by the patron in Encore or not ...

   Idea Value
   Patrons who like printed or emailed receipts wouldn't have to ask for them every time -- consistency of service!

   This is connected to Paul Costa's idea "Check for Due Slip Delivery Method Change Before Closing Patron Record" (link). Many patrons, probably most, have a consistent preference about receipts -- either they almost always want one printed or they almost always don't. (Or prefer to have it emailed.)

   What if we had a field in the patron record that recorded this preference, and when the patron record was opened for checkouts, the print receipt button defaulted to the patron's preference?

   The field would default to "no receipt" when the patron record was created. I'd want input from others on whether… more

   31 votes

   Vote Vote Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Vote

   We’ll send you updates on this idea

   3 comments  ·  Circulation, Access Services & Fulfillment  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   CLOSED  ·  AdminMike Dicus (Product Manager, Innovative) responded

   In accordance with the Idea Graduation Workflow guidelines agreed upon by Innovative and IUG, this idea has been closed because it was submitted more than two years ago and has not been selected for inclusion in the product.

   
   

   This idea is still available for commenting but is no longer eligible for voting.

   
   

   Ideas that were submitted three or more years ago are archived for future reference.

5. Check for Due Slip Delivery Method Change Before Closing Patron Record

   Currently, Sierra goes by the delivery method selected before the last item is scanned, instead of when a user clicks the Close button. Having recently changed to not automatically print due slips, we are still working on asking patrons their preference before scanning items, but will often forget until all items have been scanned, which is too late. The workaround of using the Print Table option is less than ideal, as it doesn't follow our print template for Due Slips. As far as my knowledge goes, it also completely cuts staff off from the option to email the due slip to patrons.

   Idea Value
   Very busy staff and volunteers will have some much-needed flexibility with regard to providing proper due slips for patrons, and patrons have an extended opportunity to change their mind about how they would like to get their due notice.

   Currently, Sierra goes by the delivery method selected before the last item is scanned, instead of when a user clicks the Close button. Having recently changed to not automatically print due slips, we are still working on asking patrons their preference before scanning items, but will often forget until all items have been scanned, which is too late. The workaround of using the Print Table option is less than ideal, as it doesn't follow our print template for Due Slips. As far as my knowledge goes, it also completely cuts staff off from the option to email the due slip… more

   19 votes

   Vote Vote Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Vote

   We’ll send you updates on this idea

   2 comments  ·  Circulation, Access Services & Fulfillment  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   CLOSED  ·  AdminMike Dicus (Product Manager, Innovative) responded

   In accordance with the Idea Graduation Workflow guidelines agreed upon by Innovative and IUG, this idea has been closed because it was submitted more than two years ago and has not been selected for inclusion in the product.

   
   

   This idea is still available for commenting but is no longer eligible for voting.

   
   

   Ideas that were submitted three or more years ago are archived for future reference.

6. Bib level holds should be allowed on records with only non-viable items if there is an order record attached

   Bib level holds should be allowed on bibs with non-viable items if there is an active order record attached. Currently, this is not possible, and there is no way to configure for this. There are a number of ways to configure the (many) places dictating holds and what can be held. But at the moment, none of them allow the hold (without a staff override) if the only remaining item is non-viable (missing, lost, etc.)

   Idea Value
   It doesn't make sense to me that holds are allowed on bib records with only an order record, but as soon as that same record has a non-viable item attached, it's stopped from accepting holds.

   Half the reason we're placing orders on existing bibs is because our last copy is having to be withdrawn for one reason or another, but it's popular enough to want to replace. And so popular enough that patrons may want to place holds. I understand the design that, no matter how you're set up for holds, you generally wouldn't want holds on a record with no viable copies. But if there's an active order record on it, that should no longer matter.

   Not all libraries use order records, of course, and so this probably isn't an issue for them, as they have items in an on order status instead. I don't know if those can take holds, but if they do, it's that much more reason to be consistent for those using order records.

   FYI, evidently, there was a bug in the last few versions of Sierra that was allowing this to happen, so we we merrily went on our way, assuming this was expected behavior. Turns out, it was "corrected" in 5.3. On the bright side, how hard could it be to make it an option again!

   Bib level holds should be allowed on bibs with non-viable items if there is an active order record attached. Currently, this is not possible, and there is no way to configure for this. There are a number of ways to configure the (many) places dictating holds and what can be held. But at the moment, none of them allow the hold (without a staff override) if the only remaining item is non-viable (missing, lost, etc.)

   Idea Value
   It doesn't make sense to me that holds are allowed on bib records with only an order record, but as soon as that… more

   14 votes

   Vote Vote Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Vote

   We’ll send you updates on this idea

   0 comments  ·  Circulation, Access Services & Fulfillment  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   CLOSED  ·  AdminMike Dicus (Product Manager, Innovative) responded

   In accordance with the Idea Graduation Workflow guidelines agreed upon by Innovative and IUG, this idea has been closed because it was submitted more than two years ago and has not been selected for inclusion in the product.

   
   

   This idea is still available for commenting but is no longer eligible for voting.

   
   

   Ideas that were submitted three or more years ago are archived for future reference.

7. Add option to email checkin receipt to patron

   Currently Sierra offers the option to email the patron due date information. We use courtesy notices via email as a backup notification of due dates. We would like the option to email the checkin slip as well. We always offer the option to print a receipt upon checkin, and may patrons appreciate that, but have often commented that it would be more convenient to receive the checkin confirmation via email instead of being printed on a slip of paper that can get lost.

   Idea Value
   Email is easier to search and archive, whereas a paper receipt is prone to getting mangled and/or lost. In addition, because many items are checked in after the patron has left the desk, it would be an extra benefit to notify the patrons via email even when not physically present that the books they returned were checked in and removed from their account. Also, it would save on purchasing printer paper, and friendly to the environment.

   Currently Sierra offers the option to email the patron due date information. We use courtesy notices via email as a backup notification of due dates. We would like the option to email the checkin slip as well. We always offer the option to print a receipt upon checkin, and may patrons appreciate that, but have often commented that it would be more convenient to receive the checkin confirmation via email instead of being printed on a slip of paper that can get lost.

   Idea Value
   Email is easier to search and archive, whereas a paper receipt is prone to getting… more

   •  

   22 votes

   Vote Vote Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Vote

   We’ll send you updates on this idea

   0 comments  ·  Circulation, Access Services & Fulfillment  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   CLOSED  ·  AdminMike Dicus (Product Manager, Innovative) responded

   In accordance with the Idea Graduation Workflow guidelines agreed upon by Innovative and IUG, this idea has been closed because it was submitted more than two years ago and has not been selected for inclusion in the product.

   
   

   This idea is still available for commenting but is no longer eligible for voting.

   
   

   Ideas that were submitted three or more years ago are archived for future reference.

8. Clearer distinction between expired holds and clear the holdshelf

   When a patron's hold expires or an item is cleared from the holdshelf, the Program column in View Canceled Holds reads "Clear Holdshelf" for both processes. A more apparent distinction between the two would be helpful to both patrons and staff.

   Idea Value
   The ability to see the difference between an expired hold and an item cleared from the holdshelf would allow staff to accurately explain to a patron why their hold was removed from their account. Differentiating between the two would also assist staff in troubleshooting issues with the Clear the Holdshelf and expired holds processes.

   33 votes

   Vote Vote Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Vote

   We’ll send you updates on this idea

   2 comments  ·  Circulation, Access Services & Fulfillment  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   CLOSED  ·  AdminMike Dicus (Product Manager, Innovative) responded

   In accordance with the Idea Graduation Workflow guidelines agreed upon by Innovative and IUG, this idea has been closed because it was submitted more than two years ago and has not been selected for inclusion in the product.

   
   

   This idea is still available for commenting but is no longer eligible for voting.

   
   

   Ideas that were submitted three or more years ago are archived for future reference.

9. Block patron circulation based on the number of overdue items

   As libraries eliminate fines they would like alternative ways to provide an incentive for patrons to return items. We would like the option to block patron circulation based a Library determined number of overdues. This rule could be added to the Patron Block table so that libraries could customize rule as necessary.

   Idea Value
   Libraries use the patron block table to determine when a patron is blocked from circulation. As this table exists, could the # of item overdues be added to this table? Libraries could set this behaviour (as they do all patron block settings).

   Value: Although we never want to provide obstacles to circulation, Libraries that no longer charge fines want a way to block patrons based on the number of overdues they have. We don't want to wait for customers to incur billing costs. This new setting would provide an incentive for Customers to return their items.

   Value: We don't want to manage this manually. We shouldn't put staff in the position of evaluating whether a patron should be blocked.

   Value: Selfchecks would also automatically block patrons from checkout (and Customers could be redirected to Staff for more information).

   Value: Libraries would not need to set up "overdue penalty points" - and instead very quickly modify the patron blocks table.

   As libraries eliminate fines they would like alternative ways to provide an incentive for patrons to return items. We would like the option to block patron circulation based a Library determined number of overdues. This rule could be added to the Patron Block table so that libraries could customize rule as necessary.

   Idea Value
   Libraries use the patron block table to determine when a patron is blocked from circulation. As this table exists, could the # of item overdues be added to this table? Libraries could set this behaviour (as they do all patron block settings).

   Value: Although we never… more

   25 votes

   Vote Vote Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Vote

   We’ll send you updates on this idea

   0 comments  ·  Circulation, Access Services & Fulfillment  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   CLOSED  ·  AdminMike Dicus (Product Manager, Innovative) responded

   In accordance with the Idea Graduation Workflow guidelines agreed upon by Innovative and IUG, this idea has been closed because it was submitted more than two years ago and has not been selected for inclusion in the product.

   
   

   This idea is still available for commenting but is no longer eligible for voting.

   
   

   Ideas that were submitted three or more years ago are archived for future reference.

10. transfer holds between bibs

    Allow transfer of bib level holds to another bib! Documentation states that only item specific holds can be moved, and then only to bib level on the same bib or to another item. We need to be able to easily move holds or even entire hold lists to another bib.

    Idea Value
    Moving holds to a new edition of a title, or a new volume of a series. Depending on individual library cataloging and their use of monograph versus serial records, not to mention volume information, there are many instances of having title level holds on something that has been superseded by something else.Moving holds to an entirely different title entirely because a title with outdated information was replaced with a different title.Reorder process may result in a new bib for an existing title with holds

    Currently, this must be done manually, hold by hold. Not a good use of time.

    Allow transfer of bib level holds to another bib! Documentation states that only item specific holds can be moved, and then only to bib level on the same bib or to another item. We need to be able to easily move holds or even entire hold lists to another bib.

    Idea Value
    Moving holds to a new edition of a title, or a new volume of a series. Depending on individual library cataloging and their use of monograph versus serial records, not to mention volume information, there are many instances of having title level holds on something that has been… more

    32 votes

    Vote Vote Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Vote

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    2 comments  ·  Circulation, Access Services & Fulfillment  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    CLOSED  ·  AdminMike Dicus (Product Manager, Innovative) responded

    In accordance with the Idea Graduation Workflow guidelines agreed upon by Innovative and IUG, this idea has been closed because it was submitted more than two years ago and has not been selected for inclusion in the product.

    
    

    This idea is still available for commenting but is no longer eligible for voting.

    
    

    Ideas that were submitted three or more years ago are archived for future reference.