Notes Resource Bookings

Thursday 13th January, 2005
I found an interesting feature request in the Notes 7 beta forum that I thought was worth highlighting to the community.

Mathew Newman has suggested that when booking meetings including a room that there should be a lead time applied at the start and/or the end. For example I book a meeting from 1400-1500 and this invitation gets sent to the attendees, but the room/projector etc get sent a slightly adjusted request; maybe 1345-1515. This allows a 15 minute turnaround time between meetings allowing for over-runs etc and making sure the room is empty when the attendees arrive.

Matthew even included a nice graphic...



Image:Notes Resource Bookings





I think this is a great idea and would like to see anybody else who agree to show their support for the feature here and/or on the ND7 forum. If it doesn't make it into the ND7 gold release I'm sure we could develop an OpenNTF Resource Reservation DB that handled it if enough people liked the idea.

Over to you guys...

  1. 1) Colman Carpenter Said: (13/01/2005 17:29:56 GMT) Gravatar Image
    Notes Resource Bookings

    Got my vote....would solve a few issues here. You might want to considering applying it at the resource level too, that is you specify a lead and lag time when setting up the resource so that any booking of that resource automatically applies the lead & lag.

    Query, do you need both lead and lag then ? If there is always, say, a lead time then you will never have a situation where resources bookings will butt up against each other. Having said that, it would be more elegant to specify the proper amount of time for setting up and taking down separately.

    Also, I guess the room booking would have to be automatically extended as you can't set up a projector if there's another meeting in the room :)

  2. 2) Ben Rose Said: (13/01/2005 17:39:04 GMT) Gravatar Image
    Notes Resource Bookings

    The lead time is there so the users show up after the room becomes available. This allows setup.

    The lag time is there just in case the meeting over runs.

    A 15min lead and a 15min lag would allow 30mins between meetins, as would just a 30min lead; but using both a lead and a lag allows the busytime to be updated more appropriately.

    For a 1400-1500 meeting with a 30min lead, busytime would book 1330-1500. Invites could still be sent to attendees for a 1500 meeting, not allowing for overrun.

    For a 1400-1500 meeting with a 15min lead/lag, busytime would book 1345-1515, so nobody's going to show for the next booking until 1515...a guaranteed 15minute gap.

    Make sense?

  3. 3) Philip Storry Said: (14/01/2005 07:57:19 GMT) Gravatar Image
    Notes Resource Bookings

    Nice idea, I like it!

    I'm also a little unsure of whether we need lag or not. But I say that it should be put in there just in case.

    And yes, this should be something which, in an ideal world, we'd be able to specify on the resource itself. However, they changed the handling of resource reservations in R5 - they're handled by teh router now, not by LotusScript agents as they were in R4.x. Therefore, this could be harder to do via a new Resource Reservations template...

    Not that I'm discouraging you, of course. Just thought I might be able to help prevent you from banging your head against a brick wall at some point... ;-)

  4. 4) Karl Laird Said: (20/01/2005 20:45:15 GMT) Gravatar Image
    Notes Resource Bookings

    Sounds like a great idea to me that would certainly be beneficial in an organisation like ours!

  5. 5) Bruce Kahn Said: (14/02/2005 19:26:44 GMT) Gravatar Image
    Notes Resource Bookings

    I think lead time is pretty easily grokd by everyone.

    Lag time is more useful for post-event cleanup kinds of things rather than actual "just in case" time.

    For example, the faclities folks may need it to get in, pick up that mobile projector or video conf. system and move it out before the next meeting begins. Or perhaps the food service folks need 15 minutes to come in, pack up the left overs, sweep the room and leave before the next meeting comes in. (I personally like having no lag time here because Im across from a conference room and those PM snacks are quite tasty as well as free. But I digress...).

    If the Chair thinks they may need a little extra time towards the end, they _should_ really just schedule their meeting a little longer than necessary. Otherwise I know some Chairs that would schedule a 30 minute meeting to "ensure I got the people who wont go to a 2 hour meeting" and then 'trap' them there with 90 minutes of "lag" time... Sort of like a C&S/R&R version of Bait-and-switch.

    Oh and for those that missed LS2005, the design has changed (for the better) in R7. The new design takes request handling out of the template & router and handles it in a new task. So any template tweaking is not likly going to be easily done to handle this (and certainly wont be easily handled in C&S w/o some effort too).

Add Comment
 
Subject:
   
Name:
E-mail:
Web Site:
 
Comment:  (No HTML - Links will be converted if prefixed http://)
 
Remember Me?