HI @ncassella unfortunately access to CLOR is not available for PU’s yet…

Note about using CLOR...the learning objects you place in the CLOR are tracked across all courses they are used in; meaning if a user completes course A with content from the CLOR and then access another course using the same content from CLOR, they will automatically be recognized as being complete for that learning object...We stopped using it due to this feature...Surveys can be re-used across courses without this effect but you MUST create the survey from the CLOR menu and select the correct option that does NOT track across courses.

I guess the big challenge here is re-usability of training materials.

I am newer here, but if you think about the hierarchy of containership and learning objects…
Learning Plan > Course > Training Materials (and trust me - I am just getting used to this) ...it probably makes sense that once a person completes a training material over there in X it is completed over there in Y.

Maybe one of you know? What happens with an Observation Checklist? I mean if we have an annual one, we would want to reuse that one over and over again…...not necessarily copy forward a new copy every year….which would seem to be a pretty poor design.

@ncassella, we’re going through implementation, and have the same requirement. I don’t want extra super admins roaming around. Our implementation team mentioned that Power User permissions for the CLOR are on the roadmap for some time in Q3.  

This has been a big issue for my team as we prefer to upload all materials to the CLOR but by doing that it limits our course developers from being able to create or update courses/materials in the LMS themselves. 

Hi @ncassella and @mark! As @steveninfinger mentioned, Power User access to the Central Repository is on the roadmap, at this point planned for some time in 2022. Until then, @Annarose.Peterson shared a really awesome process in another thread in the community that she uses to allow Power Users to work with training materials from the Central Repository by using the Duplicate Course feature. Check out the thread below.

This could be a great way to avoid assigning Superadmin permissions to others in the platform who really only need PU access. Do you think this could help solve the problem for you in the short term until PU access to the Central Repository is made available?

The work around described doesn’t really fix things. It’s utility only lies in creating new courses. We need to allow a group of power users to create and update courses using available assets in the CLOR. We don’t want to make them SuperAdmins as that’s too many opportunities for error.

I understand that the functionality has been pushed back, but do we have any idea of when it’ll be available? Sometime in 2022 is very disheartening . . .

We are currently experience the same.  We are in the process of reducing Super Admins while also cleaning our CLOR.  This is highly needed for power users of our content team.

This one thing does create a type of bottlenecking indeed. But maybe that bottleneck is good? Do you really want people indiscriminately tossing material into the CLOR? I think your biggest risk of poor to no curation (as folks note above) is really going to hunt you down.

I moved from a totally decentralized effort model for a larger organization to a partially decentralized effort model a few years back to improve just this after 6 years of developing content directly in the LMS. That shift helped to prepare me for the challenges with the CLOR….and when we get a chance to give a PU access to the CLOR? Maybe? I wont put them in there.

Working with good SLAs (service level agreements) and setting expectations with your internal customers, it is my opinion that you can let them know that you can put up a course in a good place so they can populate it in their catalogs? And then the rest is back in their ballcourt.

Give PUs full blown warnings about their catalogs as well. Currently having them have catalog and some course curation access can give them access to do a whole lot of things (or some of us would say “damage”). We definitely need more granularity surrounding course permissions. Like why would you want a general curation role to ever mess with something called advanced properties? Lol.

I really love this guidance, but it is not applicable to my company. Our LMS is paid for and managed by separate teams (one extended enterprise setup). Unless I can get all teams to agree to this methodology, at least each individual team needs to be able to make this call for themselves (as to whether or not PUs would get access to CLOR or not if we had the option). I’m also a one-man L&D team at the moment, so it’s not sustainable for me to manage all CLOR (specifically LinkedIn Learning imports) content.

Trying to build some scalable processes around this, but feeling handicapped by lack of features.

Hello All,

we are in 2022 Q3, any idea when will be implemented the power users permissions  for the CLOR?

In my opinion it´s a very important functionality to descentralize the LMS administration. 

As many have discussed here, the central repository provides an option for re-purposing content across courses, and should be a power user option to have access (at least to read from the repository).

For our process, our admins are the ones that push content into the central repository as all of it goes through our Instructional Design process, therefore our content managers, which create courses and learning plan, need to have all the material to build them. 

If the option is available to control what a PU can use in the central repository, it will help into delegating functions across the platform and not have to put super admins permissions to content developers.

Is there any update on when accessing the CLOR into courses will be a permission available to Power Users? Like many here, we would like PUs to be able to use the same materials in multiple courses via CLOR, but only Super Admins can access it. Not workable in our use case.

I just found this thread after posting a similar question. We are launching UAT tomorrow and I JUST discovered my power users are not able to access the CLR.  We are a decentralized learning organization, so this is a huge issue. Shocking, really, as we’ve been discussing this with our sales reps from the beginning of how we planned to use it and were so excited about being able to build out folders for our learning admins to organize their content and keep everything fresh & up to date.

Unfortunately, based on this new information, I’ve now tied the hands of the very people responsible for training in our organization and do not look forward to trying to explain this to them. I am NOT going to make them power users, just to give them access to the CLR. I also am not prepared to take on training for the whole organization. PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE tell me this is coming soon. I see on the posts above this has been a request for at least a year now. 

My recommendations for creating this new set of permissions for Power User Profiles:

• CLR: View Categories
• CLR: Edit Categories 
• CLR: Create Categories
• CLR: Delete Categories
• CLR: Manage Categories (selecting by user/profile which categories the users can “manage” - manage would mean, adding training, editing/deleting training, preview, push to course, etc.)

I am happy to be a beta tester for this to get it off the ground faster.