[OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] ***SPAM*** Re: Placing Holds on Records with Parts

[Michele Morgan]

Hi All,

Implementing parts does have it's challenges, and it's not perfect yet, but we 
feel it's a big step in the right direction.

Implementing parts affords the huge benefit that patrons are able to place their 
own holds on materials like popular dvds, and actually get the part they want, 
rather than needing to ask a staff member to place copy level holds for them.

We are still working on converting data to parts after migration, and we 
struggled with the catalog display that didn't make it clear enough that a 
choice of part might need to be made. We tried to make the display clearer, 
which has helped. Here's a screenshot:

http://screencast.com/t/Y4gc7bplc

There are also a few bugs that make managing parts and converting the data 
difficult, but we still feel that the benefits of using parts outweigh the 
current headaches.

-Michele

On 9/25/2013 2:12 PM, Mary Llewellyn wrote:
> Hi Brent,
>
> The mention of parts and part holds makes me twitch!
>
> When we first started implementing parts, like you, we had a mixture of items
> with and without parts. The “All Parts” label for the title level hold confused
> librarian and patron alike, leading them to think that the hold was being placed
> upon every part. Instead, patrons would often get an item that should have had a
> part label, but didn’t, so they’d get a piece they didn’t want, as you describe
> “Getting Part 2 when they thought they were getting the entire collection.”
> Unhappy patrons, unhappy librarians.
>
> So we removed the text “All parts” and left it blank, hoping that would lead the
> patron to actually open the dropdown list when placing the hold, so they would
> actually look at the list of parts and select one. That didn’t fly either.
>
> Finally, we made a rule that if one library broke a set into parts and labeled
> them, then the other libraries that circulated the set as a whole needed to use
> a part labeled as “boxed set.” We removed the title level hold entry entirely
> for bibs with items with parts. The result is the patron can pick either the
> “boxed set” part or an individual. No more title level holds in this case. Any
> library not applying a part will not have their items available for holds. I
> think that has calmed things down a bit.
>
> But don’t get me started about the librarians that want their patrons to be able
> to place holds on part 1, part 2, part 3, in one step, not realizing that
> defeats the purpose of parts…to be able to control the order in which the part
> hold is filled!
>
> Mary
>
> Mary Llewellyn
>
> Database Manager
>
> Bibliomation, Inc.
>
> 24 Wooster Ave.
>
> Waterbury, CT 06708
>
> mllewell at biblio.org
>
> *From:*open-ils-general-bounces at list.georgialibraries.org
> [mailto:open-ils-general-bounces at list.georgialibraries.org] *On Behalf Of *Brent
> Mills
> *Sent:* Tuesday, September 24, 2013 3:37 PM
> *To:* Evergreen Discussion Group
> *Subject:* [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Placing Holds on Records with Parts
>
> Hello everyone,
>
> I was wondering if someone could help me get some clarity on hold targeting
> within records that have a mix of items with parts and without.
>
> In a record like this one: http://tinyurl.com/pbg9lkz, there are a mix of
> libraries that don't split out the item into parts and those that do.
>
> My question is, when a patron (or staff member) goes to place a title level hold
> on a record that has a mix of parts and no parts, if they select the default
> "All Parts" option instead of "Part 1" or "Part 2" (pic:
> http://tinyurl.com/lqaogmy), does the hold target both parts as a whole in
> addition to the other, non-parted items? Or does it fill the hold by grabbing
> the first available item? Basically, when a patron selects the "All Parts"
> option, what is Evergreen looking at when choosing where to place the hold? Hope
> that made some sense. Curious if patrons might be getting a "Part 2" of
> something when they thought they were getting the entire collection.
>
> Just basically looking for some advisement on hold targeting behavior with a mix
> of parts/no parts.
>
> Thanks!
>
> -----------------------------
>
> Brent Mills
> Sage Technical Support Specialist
> Hood River Library District
> 502 State Street / Hood River OR / 97031
>
> email: brent at hoodriverlibrary.org <mailto:brent at hoodriverlibrary.org>
> tickets: https://sagesupport.eou.edu <https://sagesupport.eou.edu/>
>

-- 
Michele Morgan, Technical Assistant
North of Boston Library Exchange, Danvers Massachusetts
mmorgan at noblenet.org