(Test-Go-Live) Policies for Resource Sharing Forms

HIGH

Recommendation:
Include identifiers as optional fields, including, for books: OCLC number, ISBN; for articles ISSN, DOI, PMID.

Rationale:

If the user can provide this information, or if it can be prepopulated in the form, locator matching will be improved both in Alma and in WorldShare ILL, and staff may be able to fill article requests using electronic material if they have the DOI or PMID. Requests may be originating in PubMed or WorldCat.

HIGH

When the patron uses the Description dropdown menu to select a volume, only one volume may be selected per request.  This will be a  problem for patrons seeking a range of volumes or a run of microfilm reels. If a patron chooses a volume then changes their selection to another volume, it causes issues with the request.

LOW

Recommendation:

Remove “Willing To Pay” box from Resource Sharing request form

If this must be included, add explanatory text.

Rationale:

Users will wonder if willingness to pay will impact whether or not their request will be filled.

LOW

Recommendation:

Add additional help text to the success box, such as “Success! You will receive an email when your request arrives” (is this a universal thing that would occur after request submission?)

Can users receive an email to confirm successful request placement?

Rationale:

New or infrequent users might not know what to expect when placing an interlibrary loan. Giving additional guidance will increase user confidence.

LOW

Recommendation:

Clarify pick up location options on Resource Sharing Request Form; have user select institution before selecting library location

Rationale: 

The differences between Preferred Local Pickup Location and Preferred Pickup Location is unclear.

HIGH

Recommendation:
It is essential that all Primo VE instances in the UC consortium be configured consistently, especially since we will have 10 of them.

Rationale:

Three Primo VE Vanguard instances are misconfigured. UCB and UCLA erroneously allow community users to use the FN to make requests to other UC’s by offering a request form instead of blocking.

UCSD is blocking non-eligible ILL users but allowing the AFN links to appear to community users and giving the false positive to these patrons that their request went through.

HIGH

Recommendation:
Clean-up the pick-up locations menu so that only options where a patron can truly pick up an item appear. Remove the No Campus (EMPTY and Resource Sharing Library) section entirely.

Rationale:
Users may select a pick up option that is not truly available

LOW

Recommendation:

Create unique Resource Sharing Request forms for each major content type, Book, Article. Match delivery methods to content, i.e. Book allows for Physical or partial digitization. 

Rationale:

The form currently implies users can request to have full books digitized or photocopied. 

LOW

Recommendation:

Ensure messages use the same language across the various tasks patrons can complete, using the second person rather than third (i.e., “you” and “your” rather than “the patron”)

Example: Second person point of view (recommended)

Example: Third person point of view (not recommended)

Example: Inconsistent language (not recommended)

LOW

Recommendation:

If non-circulating items will continue to be exposed through the network scope, make it transparent to users that these materials cannot be shipped and are only available for use within the other UC library by removing the Resource Sharing option.

Ensure correct rules are in place for these non-circulating materials

I can only see that this item is “Not loanable” after I’ve clicked into UC San Diego within the Get It From Other Institutions list

Rationale:

Users will be frustrated if they believe they can request these items when they are actually only available on site.

LOW

Recommendation:
Suppress those Fulfillment Network (FN) links for non-eligible users, or if that cannot be done, consider changing the “Get It From Other Institutions” to something like “Available at these institutions’.  

Note: However, the good news is this issue may soon be moot, as a recent decision by the Fulfillment and ILL Functional Group is to only have the AFN in the test environment, and not even offer the FN to anyone. 

Rationale:

The Get it links showing availability from other institutions may also raise false expectations that community users can access items from other UC’s by clicking on links. As shown by arrow B. 

Frustration may be exacerbated for these non-eligible users when clicking on the links (although properly programmed) send them in a circle where nothing happens.  All they get is a back button with nothing basically happening for them.