Discovery: Usability Testing plan for Nov will involve working with the various FGs. See document for details. Functionality testing during October has been going well, especially with VG buddy system. In conversation with CARLI Users Group re: Primo VE for the NZ decision. Their union view is sign-in access only.
RMFG: We’re working through decision pages and on track to finish up in line with our decision calendar. We have gotten great feedback from various FGs! The NZ is way more complicated than the make it seem.
DCFG: We’re still a little bit hampered by not having any Vanguard digital collections harvested into Primo VE, but are working on that challenge with both CDL and UCLA.
AEFG: We are continuing with coordinated testing (between already-Alma and Vanguard) on e-resources, data verification, etc. The biggest challenge is data interpretation between NZ and IZs.
TSELG: YBP folks will come to next meeting. Update about Marcive will happen at next meeting as well. Xiaoli will send a summary.
This may not actually need to be escalated, however it is still in the works with the FG trying to make sense of what they are seeing in the IZs and NZ. Trying to test if the UCB instance has duplicate portfolios; a comparison across VG campus sites
The problem statement is not yet clear, nor next steps. Requesting other eyes on this from Discovery and RMFG. Considering reaching out to ExL to see if they could show them what they are seeing and help assess why they are seeing what they are seeing (to affirm or explicate).
Does this decision need to be made by Oct 30th? Post questions about this on BC rather than trying to figure it out. The data is clearly not behaving as it should. Possible that a decision will not be made by test load.
Making sure we do not break the continuity of service for mass dig projects such as Google Books and HathiTrust.
This may not be an unknown workflow with 5 campuses already on Alma
This testing could be slated part way through test load. Ask the campuses already on Alma to do the testing in a consortial environment.
Revisit this topic in January
5
Managing campus expectations
Pressure to address all possible scenarios/policies/workflows before cutover
How to communicate out beyond the cohort
20
All
What are realistic expectations? Who should communicate those out?
Getting a lot of the same questions - questions are repeats of what was asked before based on folks who are just now joining the project
Discovery’s implementation team is going to use local campus Confluence to point people to (like an FAQ)
Fulfillment is not getting that many outside questions. The biggest question before them is the RLFs and how that will work.
ASCELG getting lots of questions about Aeon
AEFG: We have talked about change mgmt. for e-resources workflow approach and that paradigm shift.
Solution/mitigation:
Create a local FAQ on your Confluence
Ok to tell people that we do not have an answer yet
It’s not something we can answer at this time
Document it
Our focus now is on migration - the answers to the questions will come in time
Do we need some kind of messaging to send out? No. Ok to handle it individually.
6
PM Update
5
Christine
We can expect access to the vanguard test environment through December 18.
Last day to escalate anything in VG is today. I saw on slack that one group might need an extension. Has that been resolved?
Available dates for special meetings:
Oct 22 - Implementation Coordinator-led discussion on Aeon integration. The 5 campuses who have integrated Aeon in Primo/Primo VE will present on their experience with time for Q&A.
Oct 26 (1 hour)
Oct 29 - Technical 3rd party integrations overview presentation by Ex Libris
Contact Lena to get the invite if you or your group would be interested
7
RLF Questions
Confirm if any of the FGs, particularly Discovery, Resource Management & Fulfillment-ILL, are addressing these questions in their groups
Next steps?
30
Lynne & Cathy
Currently each campus does their own thing in their catalog in regard to their items deposited in an RLF
Some delete 100% of RLF deposited records from their catalog
Some keep them in catalog and display to patrons with a RLF location;
Some keep them in catalog but suppress them from public view (generally kept for stats and proof of ownership over time)
Each approach has its own pros and cons
Is this a candidate for harmonization?
SRLF gets their records from the campuses, NRLF gets their records from OCLC. What will be the approach when we go live? This issue is also political. PPC could look at this, but it may need to go to an ELG. Some campuses still count their RLF materials in their stats.
Who “owns” this decision and who addresses the pros and cons (seems like this covers Resource management, Discovery & Fulfillment). Does anyone ever consult with the RLFs before making decisions? This should be happening at the local level. Are there any communication gaps? Xiaoli noted that several FGs have noted that RLFs are a group they will consult.
RMFG is finalizing their record management decision on Tuesday and will share with Cathy and Lynne.
8
Homework
9
Parking Lot
Revisit “Lessons Learned” meeting idea in November
The SILS mission is to transform library services and operations through innovation and collaboration. The future is shared!
Question? Contact AskSILS-L@ucop.edu