Jump to content

Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 01/16/2019 in all areas

  1. 2 points
    All, It is on beta at moment and will look to release live next week. So click on a single link, then right click on canvas where you want to place intersecting node, choose top menu item and select the type of node you want to add. Cheers
  2. 1 point
    @HHH Sure, here the closure stage process that we set up, see below: As you can see that 2 Stage Closure (5 day expiry) node with decision node. What it does for us is that it would suspend the BPM for 5 working days and if anyone (whether customer or agent like myself) Update the ticket by either email or comment within 5 working days, it would go up and reopen the ticket. So in your case, you could use that with closed process like above but for closed status however I do not know if it would work though. Let me know if it does. Hope this helps. Aaron
  3. 1 point
    Hi developers We would like the excellent feature of versioning that is available in the Business Process designer to be available in Progressive Capture designer as well. It would save the hassle of needing to manually create a backup copy when making changes to a ProgCap process.
  4. 1 point
    @Victor Tested from my end all working thanks Victor to the rescue as always
  5. 1 point
    @Victor Thank you. Affected users now confirm that the issue is resolved.
  6. 1 point
    Hi @Shamaila.Yousaf thanks for the suggestion. We have a story for allowing some visibility for connections of a request on self service and this has quite a bit of community support so i would hope we would see some movement on this soon, we'll post back here once this story is scheduled and progresses. Steve
  7. 1 point
    @Shamaila.Yousaf - we are aware of this, it was a brief bottleneck in the infrastructure resources. The infrastructure team is looking into this (as to why) but it should be ok now...
  8. 1 point
    Hi @Martyn Houghton, The logging of iBridge method invocations and errors to the ESPServerService log has been added to the platform and will be available in the next platform build (>2975). Cheers, Steve
  9. 1 point
    Hi @Shamaila.Yousaf I have raised a change request for this and linked yourself and this post to it. It has been added to our backlog. I'll update this post if there are any updates to the progress of this change. Regards, James
  10. 1 point
    @HHH - is the Display Name It will be from: Display Name (email address)
  11. 1 point
    @Shamaila.Yousaf - to have an email applied to an existing request automatically, you can use a rule having this expression: REGEX_MATCH(subject, '.*\b[a-zA-Z]{2}[0-9]{8}\b.*'). There is more information about this and more examples on our wiki here: https://wiki.hornbill.com/index.php/Email_Routing_Rules Also, there is an FAQ explaining all scenarios where the rule might fail to apply an email to a request, I would suggest reading it so you know how this works and, more importantly, why it might not:
  12. 1 point
    Hi I've had a handful of analysts ask if there is a column that can be set in the request list that shows the checkpoint that the request has either most recently completed, or the next checkpoint in the business process. Is this something that is possible? I've suggested using boards for this however for some analysts this doesn't appear to be sufficient. Thanks Lauren
  13. 1 point
    @Shamaila.Yousaf - please raise a support request so we can investigate: https://www.hornbill.com/support/
  14. 1 point
    @chriscorcoran We have the same situation, so we have two rules on the 'Service' SLA rules as Victor mentions. In our case the Priority 1 is the SLA with the 24/7 working time calendar and the one beneath it is the SLA with the normal working hours. In the Priority 1 Rule we have a condition based on the organisation and priority selected, to select the 24/7 SLA. The second rule selects the normal working hours SLA. Once the "Service" SLA rules have selected the correct Service Level Agreement, then the rules within the latter are then evaluated to select the appropriate Service Level. Hope that helps. Cheers Martyn Mart
  15. 1 point
    Would it be possible to have the ability to control the display order of Frequent Asked Questions (FAQ's) within the Service properties, so that they can be reorderd when displayed on the customer portal? Cheers Martyn
  16. 1 point
    You need to go to Service Manager (not in the Admin Tool) -> Service Portfolio -> Priorities and set the colours in there. If you dont see the option to change the colours you will need to do a hard refresh of your Hornbill Instance (CTRL+F5)
  17. 1 point
    Hi I know you can assign requests via Round Robin to Request Owners but I was wondering if you can assign requests via Round Robin to a number of Teams? We have a number of Business Support Teams and are looking to see if we can dish the work out (requests received) to these teams equally and automatically using the Round Robin approach? Sam
  18. 1 point
    Hi @SJEaton At the moment the round robin assignment only works for a single team. We do have a change in our backlog which will look at providing a round robin between all the teams belonging to a service. Would this work or would you find that you have some teams supporting a service which you wouldn't want included in the round robin?
  19. 1 point
    @Josh Bridgens - so, there was a Service manager fix relating to this issue included in build 1392. You did not have this fix in your instance until yesterday when you deployed the latest available build, 1401. Since yesterday I can see only two such failures so I believe the fix works apart from these two occurrences and I can't work out why they failed...they were sent by the same user but not sure if this matters... I think it would best if we review this on Monday and see if there are many such failures then...
  20. 1 point
    @AlexTumber any updates on this in-app reporting? Without this, I am having a really tough time selling this solution to my colleagues... Especially as there is currently nothing available around budgeting and resources management...
  21. 1 point
    Hi Steffen, to add to Stevens description above, here's how that would be achieved: If Line Manager information is being stored against a user (typically populated through the user import) there is scope to replace the first human task with an automated email to the line manager as follows: Of course you can adjust the "on-Hold" behaviour to suit your particular scenario(s) too. Dan
  22. 1 point
    @Martyn Houghton agreed this is a well trodden path with the existing request types, this is now a case of prioritisation and getting this scheduled
  23. 1 point
    When there are routing rules configured to process an email to raise a request or update a request, there are occasions when these actions are not performed. There are a number of possible reasons why this occurs. Firstly there has to be a routing rule configured in admin tool that will match the email properties (as configured in the rule expression) The email sender does not exist in the system either as a co-worker/internal user or a contact/external user. In this scenario, one reason why the email fails to be processed by the routing rule is if the app setting to allow updates from unknown sources is turned OFF and the app setting to send back a rejection email is turned OFF. The email sender does not exist in the system, either as a co-worker/internal user or a contact/external user. Similar scenario as above, another reason why the email fails to be processed by the routing rule is if the app setting to allow updates from unknown sources is turned OFF and the app setting to send back a rejection email is turned ON but either the app setting for rejection mailbox and/or email template is incorrect or not set. The email sender exists in the system but the from address is matching more than one user/contact in the system. The request has status closed. In this scenario, one reason why the email fails to be processed by the routing rule is if the app setting to allow updates on closed calls is turned OFF and the app setting to send back a rejection email is turned OFF. *[Only for routing rules configured for UPDATE] The request has status closed. Similar scenario as above, another reason why the email fails to be processed by the routing rule is if the app setting to allow updates on closed calls is turned OFF and the app setting to send back a rejection email is turned ON but either the app setting for rejection mailbox and/or email template is incorrect or not set. *[Only for routing rules configured for UPDATE] The application settings can be found in admin tool (Home - Hornbill Service Manager - Application Settings) as follows: allow updates from unknown sources: app.email.routing.rules.unknownUsers.allow end back a rejection email: app.email.routing.rules.unknownUser.sendRejectionEmail rejection email template: app.email.routing.rules.unknownUser.email.template rejection email mailbox: guest.app.requests.notification.emailMailbox
  24. 1 point
    @Charlie Jones We have raised it internally and hope to have an answer out to you soon. I see this is a popular request. I will see what I can do Thanks Pamela
  25. 1 point
    +1 - more interaction with assets, especially via the BPM is quite an important one. In addition that what you have said, I hope that someday we can auto-link assets with other assets via the BPM (for example linking an Application a New Starter requires, to their laptop in Hornbill)... or even being able to include multiple users in the "Used by" field against an asset, via the BPM. This will help automate things a lot where this is concerned, by helping keeping the data up-to-date.
×