(Go Live) CDI Models: FullyFlexible or EasyActive

Legend: not started IN PROGRESS STALLED decided

Recommendation

After conducting extensive consultations and research, as well as carefully considering the impact of each CDI model on both end-users and staff, the UCs will use the EasyActive setting.

Reasoning

While neither model of CDI is perfect, the FullyFlexible setting requires more work, and potentially more staffing, to manage. While it may seem desirable to control CDI activation manually, we believe that many of the problems stemming from the inability to exclude collections will probably be temporary (eg. broken links, offensive metadata) or infrequently encountered by end users. Using the EasyActive model, campuses will no longer be able to exclude undesirable collections from their Primo search results. While many of these collection records will only be encountered when users “Expand” their search (for campuses who choose to limit by availability), records from Open Access collections should be included in initial search results sets due to their immediate availability. Discovery Functional Group’s research indicates users ignore the “Expand my results” filter. It is also important to note that while CDI collections in the EasyActive model cannot be “de-searchified” (ie. hidden from users even in expanded results sets), administrators can “override” the full-text activation, effectively hiding these collections behind the “Expand” option (for campuses limiting by availability).

The guidelines for campus consideration around how limiting by availability impacts user experience will be available by go-live.

Background

1. All institutions in a consortium must use the same CDI activation model, either EasyActive or FullyFlexible.

2. EasyActive was implemented for the Test Load.

3. With EasyActive, all collections in CDI (except a small subset) are now searchable in Primo and you cannot turn them off. Ex Libris assumes that campuses will limit what is searchable by availability (clicking a box to expand the search to items available in print and via ILL). Cons: research indicates that users ignore the “Expand my results” filter and this model may get more support tickets and ILL requests.

4. “The FullyFlexible setting does require the library to manage all their activations themselves, on an ongoing basis, including for collections used for alternative coverage of providers that are not directly indexed in CDI. The EasyActive setting activates the majority of collections automatically without library intervention.”(from “What is the EasyActive Setting?” in Ex Libris Knowledge Center). Cons: more staff time needed to activate and deactivate collections.

5. The roadmap of CDI product development is all new ALMA customers should be on EasyActive model. The Fullyflexible model is a transitional model for PCI customers to move CDI, and eventually they will move to EasyActive model in the future. 

6. No UC Alma campus is using CDI yet or planning to move to CDI in production before go-live.

7. Ex Libris is not saying that they couldn’t switch us from our current EasyActive to FullyFlexible, however, switching from the EasyActive model to the FullyFlexible model has never been done/tested.

8. If we switch to FullyFlexible for cutover, we could lose any configurations we have currently set in EasyActive during test load. 

Questions to consider

1. Do we have a choice of which CDI model to use (FullyFlexible or EasyActive)? Answer: Communication with Ex Libris leads us to infer that we do.

2. Will EasyActive settings be saved from Test Load to Go-Live? (i.e., if we turn off CDI collections in Test, will that “stick” through Go-Live). Answer: Yes they will be saved.
   The changes the campuses make now in CDI collections (i.e. CDI related attributes in collections or manually activate collections from exception list) in Testload will be retained at Cutover.
   EXL will run export report before cutover data frozen in TestLoad/Pre-production environment.
   At cutover, EXL will import the report and apply the changes to cutover data.

   1. Is there a difference for the already-Alma campuses? Answer: There is no difference for the already-Alma campuses from the process listed above. Just a reminder however they must switch to EasyActive model in their live production environment before cutover.

   2. How much work will need to be done right after go-live? Answer: The export & import should take care of the task with no additional work after go-live.

   3. Link to Basecamp post with other questions & answers on CDI EasyActive model for UCs: https://3.basecamp.com/3765443/buckets/15553579/messages/3398528891 (access is restricted to the SILS cohort).

3. What are the concerns of each campus? Answer: Neither model is perfect, but FF will be more time consuming overall and require more staff to support the work.

Approach

1. Do testing at campuses and in functional groups to inform us.

2. Consult with campuses about their concerns.

3. Consult with other consortia

Action Log