Joint meeting of the Customer Support Advisory Group and Clarivate Colleagues.
- Known Issues Portal project- Status and Next Steps – KI Portal testing to begin Q2 2025
- Defect resolution project – all defect fixes are included in release notes as they are fixed. Note – for new defects resolution for normal priority defects is expected to happen within 6 months. With a target of 75% of calls.
- Consortia Support – in scope/out of scope for groups (this group and the Consortia Community of Practice Group)
- Defect vs Enhancement – We were asked to raise an issue on behalf of the Primo WG. Examples of cases which are defects but the customer has been asked to submit to Ideas Exchange for a fix.
- Salesforce interface – Undocumented changes to Support interface – issue now fixed.
Zoom AI Summary (DRAFT)
Meeting summary for JOINT – Clarivate/IGeLU/ELUNA Customer Support Advisory Group (23/01/2025)
Quick recap
The meeting focused on enhancing support issues and best practice for Consortia and improving the relationship between the Consortia Central Office and its members, with discussions on the tools for incident management and problem management within a consortium. The team also reviewed the process of categorizing cases in the development team, the progress of the ‘Known Issue’ project, and the resolution of a previously mentioned issue related to the UI.
Actions
• Alex to send calendar invitation for the next meeting on February 13th.
• Alex and Wendy to consider adding a standing item for updates from the Consortia Community of Practice group.
• Ex Libris product management team to review the list of incidents vs. enhancements provided by the Primo working group.
• Alex to prepare for selecting early access customers for the known issues portal testing in Q2 (April-May timeframe).
• Ex Libris team to provide updates on the known issues portal project progress in future meetings.
• IGeLU and Ex Libris to discuss rollout preparations and communication strategies for the known issues portal in future meetings.
• Alex to create an in-scope document for the Support Advisory Group, clarifying the group’s role in addressing consortium-specific support issues.
• Luda and Dana to continue monitoring the progress of the defect resolution project and provide updates in future meetings.
• Dana to evaluate if the 6-9 month target for resolving 75% of normal priority defects is achievable for the completed functional areas (analytics and infrastructure).
• Support team to ensure that defects resolved as part of the backlog cleanup initiative are clearly listed in the release notes.
• Maude to continue working with the Consortia Working Group, focusing on enhancements and evolving the consortia model.
Summary
Enhancing Consortia Value and Workflow
The meeting involved a discussion about the relationship between the Consortia group and the Central Office, with a focus on enhancing the value of the Consortia and improving the relationship between the Consortia Central Office and its members. The group also discussed the establishment of a workflow for the Consortia Central Office to raise critical issues affecting the entire consortia. There was also a discussion about the tools for incident management and problem management within a consortium. The group considered the idea of having a standing item to receive updates from the Consortia group, particularly from MD and Wendy. The conversation ended with a suggestion for more members to join the group and receive updates on discussions related to tools and support for consortia.
Focusing on Broader Consortia Issues
The group discussed the purpose and focus of their meetings. Ann-Louise clarified that the group should focus on broader issues and frameworks for support, rather than specific issues reported in Salesforce. The group agreed that they should not delve into individual problems but rather look at general issues. Wendy added that the group provides insight into consortia issues, such as the time it takes to close cases after completion. The group also discussed the possibility of a long-term standing group, with Luda expressing a desire for this. MD mentioned that the consortial community of practice is currently North America-based, but there is a similar group in Europe. Dana confirmed the existence of a coordinators group. MD also mentioned that a Swiss consortium representative had joined their meetings in the past.
Categorizing Cases and Improving Communication
The team reviewed an ‘incident versus enhancement list’, with the intention of addressing the issue on a general level rather than focusing on specific examples. The team agreed to align expectations and understand the logic behind declaring something as an enhancement suggestion rather than a defect. They also discussed the possibility of escalating individual issues if someone believes they were wrongly judged.
Dana explained the process of categorizing cases in the development team, emphasizing the importance of distinguishing between defects and enhancement requests. She noted that sometimes cases are wrongly categorized, leading to miscommunication with customers. Luda suggested that if a customer disagrees with the categorization, they should challenge the decision through the support process. The team also discussed the importance of learning from past cases and improving communication with customers. Karen suggested adding a template to help customers write better support cases, and Martin clarified the process of reopening or cloning old cases. The team agreed to review the list of wrongly categorized cases and consider improving communication with customers in future meetings.
Known Issue Project Progress and Timeline
The team discussed the progress of the ‘Known Issue’ project, focusing on building a portal for customers to search for and subscribe to updates on known issues. The project plan was shared, outlining the discovery process, development, testing, and rollout phases. The team also discussed the need for early access customers for end-to-end testing, with the aim to have them selected by April or May. The portal is expected to be up and running by the end of Q2, with ongoing support and maintenance thereafter. Emily asked about the inclusion of Primo in the Alma and Content phase, to which Luda responded that they are focusing on Primo VE in most areas. Luda also mentioned that they haven’t started scoping anything for Primo yet. The team agreed to revisit the project plan and timeline in future meetings.
Support UI – issue raised regarding the changes to the UI when raising a call.
In the meeting, Alex and Luda discussed the resolution of a previously mentioned issue related to the UI (Support Interface). Orit shared that the issue was resolved the previous day.
Next meeting
The next meeting was scheduled for the 13th of February, which was confirmed to be a good timing due to potential conflicts on the 20th and 27th.
**AI-generated content may be inaccurate or misleading. Always check for accuracy**