Jump to content


Supportworks Users
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


chrisnutt last won the day on April 17 2018

chrisnutt had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

19 Good

About chrisnutt

  • Rank
    Senior Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    South Kensington

Recent Profile Visitors

1,211 profile views
  1. Thanks @Keith Stevenson, was about to post to say it was working again. I look forward to an explanation, I know I will be asked for one! Thanks
  2. Hi, I've arrived this morning and found that Hornbill is not working for us today. We get a "Could not connect to the Service" message. Checking the instance shows: Status Check Instance Health Check Fail The service specified is not available: system and another message saying: We have detected a problem with your instance, please wait 2 minutes and try again I've waited 2 minutes several times and it is still down I'm afraid. Can someone look into this? Is this just us? Thanks Chris
  3. @Victor thanks! That did the trick. Very useful features in there. Chris
  4. Hi, I have a activity which requires the person completing it to enter a date. Just a date, no time. I want to use that date in an email template. However, when I set up the template, I get the date and a time of 01:00:00. Is there a way to suppress the time on the template? Thanks Chris
  5. @Deen, thanks. Can I request it as an enhancement here? Definitely something that will be useful for us. Chris
  6. Hi, We have servicemanager.portal.requests.showStaffRequests enabled to allow people to see the requests in the system for anyone they manage. This is a requirement for some teams on IT Services. However, we are potentially interested in adding a service where the ability for a manager to see requests raised by someone they manage could be problematic - it's a HR service. Is it possible to restrict the ability by service? I.E. allow managers to see requests for those they manage on say the "Account Management" service but not allow it on the "HR" service? If not, is there anything in the pipeline? Thanks Chris
  7. @Victor, thanks for this. I've been off for the last couple of weeks so will look into this again when time allows and update you. Thanks
  8. @Paul Alexander Ditto! Thanks for this. @James Ainsworth, thanks for the feedback. It's good to know that there is something in the works. Could you keep us updated? Chris
  9. Hi All, I'm curious about how people are structuring their services? I want/need to review and revise ours and I have a few ideas but I thought it might be worth seeing what others are doing. Attached is what we have currently on the Service Portal. As you can see... it's a little busy! Some of the names - while seeming great at the time of inception - are also not very user-friendly. We are suffering from introducing lots of different business areas as services as well. Unless we do something, this is only going to get worse! Any and all comments and criticisms on ours are welcome! I've considered condensing everything into one or two IT Service(s) but then I fear we'll lose reporting and SLA functionality among other things One thing that I'd like to raise with Hornbill themselves, I find the Service Category drop-down menu on the Service Portal is not widely used. People just don't seem to a) see it or b) understand what it is for. I was wondering if there is any internal chatter about rethinking that? Possibly giving us a couple of different ways to implement it? Personally, I would find it extremely useful to have those categories as top-level icons - like services are currently - which then allow the user to click through to all the services in that category. If my current form is anything to go by, I'll be told that we can already do that - I certainly hope so! Thanks Chris
  10. @Victor is the above not what you were after? Chris
  11. @Victor Sure, see attached. Thanks Chris it-request-relationships.report.txt
  12. @Victor Thanks. I think I'm nearly there. I have created a report that returns the attached. There is only one problem In the attached, the relationship I have defined is that the incident has been caused by the change. When setting up the "Caused by" relationship I stipulated a reverse of "Caused". What I was hoping to see is that the report would return that: IN00108231 was caused by CH00107625 and CH00107625 caused IN00108231 However, this doesn't seem to have come across. I haven't linked into the request table though. Will that be needed? Thanks Chris
  13. Hi @James Ainsworth, I'm looking again at impact and urgency. Can you point me in the correct direction for these "Custom Progressive Capture" forms you've introduced as I'm not sure how these differ from the already existing customisation I use so would like to read up? I'd also like to express my surprise that the tool doesn't natively handle impact and urgency yet. This, I feel, would be seen as a critical feature of a tool such as this. Please can you justify why it can't and why it seems to have slipped off your to-do list? Thanks Chris
  • Create New...