Thanks for clarifying! Reviewing this again, I realized I had lost sight of the first screenshot at the top - the rightmost pane looks like it shows all changes for a particular record within the Users app, without going into the Change Tracker and filtering/searching for the specific record. So are there two ways to see all changes for record X? Or is the thinking now that opening the full Change Tracker app is the only way?
My last replied was a bit confusing, let me rephrase it. To see all changes for record X, you could either click on the change tracker icon of record X or open the Change tracker app and look for this record.
The difference between both is that via the Change tracker app, users could easily see changes history for a specific field at a glance. For instance, if you look at the last wireframe, the status field of Rosalyn Roman has been selected and on the rightmost pane, you can see all changes related to this field only.
Will it make sense for you?
Hello guys @ecboettcher @Ann-Marie @Jessica @schwill @LauraW @Joanne_Leary @taniafersenheim @PaulaSullenger! Based on all your feedback, it looks like librarians shall be able to choose which fields shall be tracked to fit all workflows and address privacy issues. To do so, we could add the change tracker as a setting option for each app and allow users to unselect tracked fields. The wireframe below is an example of the Users app settings with the change tracker option selected.
Please let me know if this idea could address privacy issues and make the app more useful for all.
this is an interesting approach on reducing the information stored. The wireframe does not show “date of change” and “sourc of change (user XY, automatic etc.)”. Both are helpful with regard to qualtity management, but in some cases unions may raise their voice here too. So providing a checkbox for them too could help different institiutions (with different unions) to make their local choice.
From a GDPR point of view it can be really helpful to reduce the historical data using the checkbox-approch. Still I assume that “deleting” historical data also is quite relevant. Deletion could be
- time driven: remove patron information from loan record after 2 weeks - necessary to follow up on damaged items returned via automatic RFID shelves
- event driven: patron (lawfully) requests deletion
- or a combination of both: delete inactive patrons after two years, if there are no open loans…
Perhaps each app using “change tracker” knows best when to delete it’s current and historic records. Does this look like an API that “change tracker” could provide for other apps with complex data management like a loan app?
Thank you for your great feedback! I will look for a way to manage automatic data deletion based on a time range and/or events.
I am not sure I fully understood your comment about “date of change” and “source of change”. These two information are shown in the Change tracker and User apps wireframes. Users could search for a specific record based on the date and source of change.
Could you give me an example showing why those two data could be useful in the change tracker settings page?
Hi @Stephanie, some unions (=Gewerkschaften, Personalräte=staff council, Betriebsräte=workers council) are concerned with “performance monitoring” of staff. Here the result can be, that it is (locally) forbidden. So tracking staff activity (item, staff-id, timestamp) openly might not be an option. Disableing it’s recording can be a remedy or perhaps “read-protection” for normal mangers/users. In rare and specific cases it might be permissable to search this data perhaps “under the eyes” of a staff council member…
“Some” would be all here in Marburg University Performance monitoring or something similar would definitely challenge our “Personalrat”, the staff and the “Datenschutzbeauftragter” (Data Protection Officer). Hesse was the first German state that introduced a general Data Protection Officer and still has the toughest rules here. Perhaps this can help our colleagues [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bundesdatenschutzgesetz].
If the tracking feature could be turned off, would that satisfy the “staff monitoring” rules at certain institutions? Some of us would like to have this available, especially when FOLIO is new. Something goes wrong, how can you track the problem if you can’t see who has done what? Is there a problem with a person, or with a poorly designed process? For me, staff monitoring isn’t for punitive purposes.
From a professional point of view I absolutely agree with you Paula Perhaps I should go back to 1993/94 when Hesse introduced OCLC LBS (the first ILS ever here): when we realized that some kind of staff monitoring would be possible in RA/circulation both sides (aka directors/staff/staff council) decided that only … well … anonymous/general/impersonal accounts would be allowed. This means that the staff at the counter uses the same neutral account at all work stations. Of course this doesn’t make sense in acquisition/resource management where we have more specialized accounts. - I - can do some tracking and staff monitoring at circulation/RA of LBS (and really need it) but to this day I’m not allowed to create personal accounts for the staff at our lending department. It’s probably a very German thing to exclude the possibility that tracking isn’t for punitive purposes as we have a history here. But - and this is our common issue: we’ll need some proper tracking and when it’s controlled by systems librarians/systems managers in a clear defined frame everything will be fine (… we even had to drop the names at the library cards a few years ago here in Marburg and our students council still prevents the introduction of a students ticket that could be read via QR tag, RFID or barcode …)