Jump to content

Gary@ADL

Supportworks Users
  • Content Count

    166
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Gary@ADL

  1. Hi Guys - so ive just done the latest update, and it has made invisible my services that were set to "service desk only", if i set them to be visible on the portal, they appear, but set them to be hidden on the portal, it also hides them from service desk view. please fix thanks
  2. we are seeing this issue too, I am trying to view tickets in another team (as im part of more than one team), but get that there are no tickets available. if I look at my colleagues queue, I can see the tickets that are in his queue that are in that team, but icant just load all the tickets in that team eagerly awaiting a fix! cheers
  3. Hi Guys - is there any way we can re-open a cancelled request? theirs no button I can use, so iwas going to do it in SQL? can anyoner advise if this will cause issues with the workflow? or can I change multiple tables to trick to set it all back to being as though it wasn't cancelled? cheers
  4. hi @James Ainsworth - we would want this rule to processed after our rule for call updates, so it didn't bounce emails from users emailing in a update to an existing call, and then yes we'd like the email "archived" after, no further action required, thanks
  5. Hi Guys - does anyone know if we can setup a rule, or some other system, whereby hornbill will auto-reply to any email we receive using a specified HTML template (we want a picture in it), we are looking to encourage users to use our portal, by basically bouncing any emails that come in and telling them to use the portal. we are ideally looking for hornbill lto do this, as if we set the auto-reply on MS outlook it wont handle existing ticket updates properly, thanks
  6. @Victor - thank you - I noticed the errors had gone on this and I was able to progress it - is this a change we can make ourselves to any other tickets that require it? or do we need to come to you guys? as I think we'l have a few more of these to come, thanks Gary
  7. thanks @Steven Boardman - we aren't trying to bypass the approval stage, we don't even need our leaver to approve anything so it wouldn't matter if his task wasn't created at all
  8. thanks @James Ainsworth - does the advanced search option search through all the tickets on the system though (asin, open, resolved, and closed, across all teams and services - the full database basically), or does it only search through the tickets available through your current view (in this case "my requests"), if it only searched tickets within the current view, I suppose we could create a view which looked at every single ticket ever logged on hornbill, but I imagine it would take forever to load? thanks
  9. thanks @Steven Boardman please could you look at my other ticket regarding how I progress a request which the user is named as a approver but has left - we don't even need him to approve it (as theirs about 8 potential people than can approve), but the system wont even allow us to progress our change. we are going to have a few requests that are like this in the coming months, and need a solution, i dont think we have any licences spare to relicense the guy, and we'd rather not anyway as this could be a few months before all the requests go through which may reference him. thanks
  10. Thanks @Dan Munns this isn't really a good option for us though, we don't have any full hornbill licences spare I don't think (our leaver was replaced straight away), and for me its not feasible to have to keep downgrading someones licence every time we need to approve a change that was raised in the last few months, as this could be going on for the next month or 2, also, the person I downgrade looses stuff I believe? (it warns you when you downgrade) - this bug needs to be fixed! there must be a way to bypass this? we shouldn't have to raise a new ticket as it wouldn't have all the timings etc again, and is very much against the point of a change control system. we are going to have this problem continuously going forwards as well as we have another leaver.
  11. Hi Guys - I have a problem with one of my change requests - it was raised at the start of last month, and has been in progress since. a member of staff has in the meantime left the business, and we have downgraded there hornbill account, and disabled the AD account. the problem is our leaver was referred to as a named user in some authorisation tasks for this change, and so now we cannot progress the request as the workflow fails. I have already updated the workflow so this is fixed in future change requests, but this doesn't change the workflow for already existing change requests. is there anyway to force the already existing change request to use the latest workflow version with the leaver removed? we don't really want to re-raise the request as this isn't then a true reflection of the change etc, CH00119059 this ticket also linked to this request - we'd like to move away from named users, but unsure if it can be done and maintain the 'flexability' we have?
  12. Hi Guys - I'm looking to revamp our change control process and how it is approved, but unsure how to go about it. currently we have a pretty robust change process, and the level of authorisation required depends on the impact of the change, and whether its an emergency. to reflect this we have several people who can authorise changes at different levels (as per image - top 4 are managers hence able to 100% sign off a low impact change - on a high impact change these same managers only have a 50% weighting) my problems are that this process falls over if we have any leavers after the process has been started (as per error message screenshot) as we downgrade the hornbill account (to free up the licence) and disable the AD account, this gives us task allocation errors and cannot progress the workflow (see image). so I am looking to move towards using groups - but I cannot see this as option (only user or variable), I'm also unsure if the groups will allow me assign 2 tasks to one group with a 50% weighting for each task? and also ensure a different person from the group completes each task? and also can I mix and match the groups? so for the example below, I would need two groups - 1 group for my 4 change managers with 1 task at 100% weighting, and 1 group for my 4 change analysts with 3 tasks with a 35% weighting, is this possible?
  13. thanks @ArmandoDM - will try and let you know if any issues, thanks
  14. thanks @Paul Alexander - bit easier getting the address this way than going via the DB
  15. Hi @ArmandoDM - ticket number is: IN00121219 - I have just done this one now, we use this process a lot, it has 15 nodes which each set the closure category (depending on the input it receives), then again separate nodes to set the closure text. the text setting nodes are working ok and the text is being applied, so we know its going down the right path, as pictured no its not appearing the database, also not appearing in our reports etc, thanks
  16. hi @ArmandoDM - yes we are on the latest version, it would be appreciated if this could be resolved quickly, as we are having to go back and amend our quicklog calls after the fact, making them not very quick! lol thanks
  17. Hi @ArmandoDM - no we do not get any error messages, and yes ive double checked the categories and they all exist (theirs approx. 13 different ones), I know its going down the correct path, as it sets the appropriate resolution text, ive also tried to edit the node where I set the category and tried again, but this still hasn't resolved, thanks
  18. bump - anyone any ideas on this one? thanks
  19. Hi Guys - we have some quick log processes, and as part of this we have some workflows which automatically populate the resolve text, category, and then close the ticket, recently (last month or so) we have noticed the closure category is not being populated? the node hasn't changed, and looks correct, so not sure why this isn't working? thanks
  20. thanks Claire - i'l have to try this this,
  21. @Dan Munns this works perfectly thank you!
  22. Hi Guys - excuse me if some of my terminology is wrong - asking for a colleague... is the URL for the customer portal compatible with iFrames? or if we need to use a different URL? Plus, does Hornbill support iFrames. As an example, in OneStop (our new intranet site), the About ADL page is an iFrame that links to our corporate site so it looks like the page is embedded in OneStop when actually its pulling from an external source, cheers
  23. Hi Guys - is there any way we can hyperlink straight to a catalogue item, within a service, within the customer portal? back story is; we have a new Intranet website, and we want to provide clicky links to our "new starter process flow", New hardware process flow" etc - but the way the portals seems to work, it doesn't give a unique URL for each catalogue item, only for each service. which we have multiple catalogue items within... which is a problem as we'd like to make it really obvious for our users! we also tried creating a new hidden service for each catalogue item, e.g. a service called "new starter", which only has one catalogue item "new starter" within it, but it doesn't let us hyperlink to hidden services either. is there anything we can do here? cheers
  24. plus one for this, we currently have 6 services the users can log tickets against, as an example, one of those services is communication. if we just had an FAQ list for the service communication, it would have several FAQS for each of; telephony, email, goto meeting, meet me, Zoom, mobile phones as you can see, even with only 2 or 3 FAQs for each category, this list would run to 18 lines, which isn't really user friendly. hence why we want to group them into sub groups, within the main (communication) service thanks
  25. Hi Guys - recently our emails stopped automatically attaching to tickets - (see screenshot - ticket is open etc), this only stopped working recently, is there a new setting we have to change? I know theirs one for allowing external users to auto-update tickets via email, but I'm an internal user, thanks Gary
×
×
  • Create New...