Dan Munns

Hi Derek, You should be able to do it within your BPM. If you have a couple of nodes at the very beginning like this: Get request details > Decision: Self Service? Y = Email Team / N = Carry on as normal I have attached a screen shot to explain a little better. Hope it helps Dan

Anybody have any ideas?

Hi James, I will have a look at doing that for the moment. Thanks [EDIT] Ok so that wont work as there is no suspend - await service level node. As all our Emergency Requests are unique they all have differing SLAs. I usually auto assign Priority unless it is an Emergency Request in which case I use suspend - await Priority but if I use Emergency as a priority there is no way for me to select the SLA relevant to the ticket that I can see. Anyone help me out? Thanks

Ok. Can I also request then that if a simple list is there for the application only and we cant use if for anything that it is locked for editing in some way. Seems that lists we can edit yet do nothing just adds confusion.

Sorry @cchana what is not possible? Setting the calls status to something other than New, Open, On-Hold, Resolved, Closed and Cancelled or setting up a view? As it stands at the moment neither work but I can see no point in allowing the creation of custom statuses if we cant use them anywhere at all.

Hi all, I have added status changes into our new starter BPM but they don't seem to be working. The BPM should check to see if a call is marked as 'Emergency' or not (which it does) and then set the status as either 'New' or 'Emergency Request' but it doesn't and the calls status stays as 'Open' (Screenshot 1 & 2) Also I have noticed that when creating a new view that the custom statuses don't come up in the list so I am unable to create a view on calls only with these statuses. (Screenshot 3 & 4) Any ideas? Thanks Dan

You can add an attachment node into the progressive capture. It is one of the default forms, at the top of the list of forms you can add.

Hi Keith, Alex is correct. I have added a 'suspend - wait for resolution' node in our BPMs which, when all previous steps are complete, moves to show the resolution text box and presents the analysts with the option to resolve the call. The call is then closed 2 days later, provided that the end user is happy and the fault is in fact fully resolved (by use of another node). I have attached a simple demo BPM example

Hi Alex, Good luck with that then. You have to love a little training!

Hi Keith, In the mean time you can still hide the resolution action button from the analysts (as mentioned in the post I linked earlier) that way the only way they can close the call is to complete the entire workflow. I do agree that I way to hide it/show it at set times during the BPM is better though.

Hi Alex, As far as I know the above way is the only way to re-assign tasks which have already been created by the BPM as the BPM will use the assign rules to generate the task and will not go back and check if the owner changes. You could, I suspect put multiple nodes into each BPM to check task ownership similar to what Ryan was saying earlier (which I assume you wont want to do) Maybe it will be a case of training your analysts to make sure all tasks are also assigned to the new owner when re-assigning calls (which can also throw up its own issues I know) Another way could be to have the BPM assign tasks to the group rather than the call owner as then anyone in the group can close task (all of my BPMs assign the tasks generated to the Service Desk group) with this option you will lose the ability to automatically show the assigned tasks in their 'my activities' view though. Sorry I cant be of anymore help. Maybe someone from Hornbill can be of further assistance / provide a better solution if nothing I have suggested helps. Thanks Dan

Hi, If this is a rare occurrence you can go into the task and click 'edit' and then click 'assign to' which will allow you to reassign the task to the new call owner. Hope that helps

Hi Keith, Have a read of the post here: You can remove the workflow buttons as I mentioned around halfway down the post which will stop your analysts skipping around the workflows. You can also set task completion to be mandatory with the setting "webapp.view.ITSM.serviceDesk.requests.resolve.denyWithOpenActivities" as mentioned by Bob in the post below mine. Hope that helps Dan

Sorry, I meant Automated Task as the node type rather than Human Task node type. The automated node is basically automatically placing the bpm in a suspend state until the analyst does something. So as you have three 'suspend bpm' tasks it wont continue with the bpm until the last suspend task has completed and the bpm is unsuspended as they are all parallel. You would get the same outcome but less confusion if you placed them one after the other as they would tick off each task as the analyst completed it. Apologies for not being clearer earlier.

Can I ask why have you used parallel processing for automated tasks? We tend to use parallel processes when we have multiple Human Tasks which are not reliant on each other for completion. I have uploaded a copy of one of our processes for you to look at. The priority, assignment and categorisation of a call can all be done one after the other and I find that this is the best way to do it. Any questions which arise from my bpm feel free to ask. Basically the bpm I have uploaded assigns the call to the service desk, checks to see if the user is authorised to make the request, checks to see if the request is an emergency request, assigns a priority, starts response and resolve timers, assigns a category and then waits for assignment to an analyst. The parallel processing only starts on the 'Action' phase when we have 3 human tasks (account creation, hardware prep and security pass creation) which have no impact on each other. I get the feeling that your not seeing the check points complete as the parallel process is made up of automated tasks only and it is waiting until they are all complete and it can close the parallel process before ticking them off (although I may be wrong so if someone else knows I am happy to be corrected) new-starter.bpm.txt

Hi Adam, What are you trying to get it to do and what are you not seeing which you would expect to see? Thanks Dan

@samwoo Looking at the this webpage source the .ico is held here: https://forums.hornbill.com/uploads/monthly_2016_05/favicon.ico.58a92a27cbf3c45abe941e36742491a7.ico If you go to the link it will show the icon although if you download it and try to use at as an .ico it says it contains no icons Even if I manually create the shortcut (right click>new shortcut) I get a white page icon with the favicon in the middle so you should definitely be able to get it. Although if the original .ico is just a renamed .bmp file they wont always work correctly as they are not true .ico files so this may be the reason. I think you are going to have to change the icon manually unfortunately. [EDIT] Looks like it is a renamed .bmp as if I rename it back to the .bmp is shows correctly as an image. You could try downloading it, renaming it to .bmp and uploading it to somewhere like http://www.favicon.cc/ to create a true .ico file which you can then use to manually set the icon for the shortcut. Also, for interest, what IE version you using?

If it is just couple of customers you are logging calls as you can remove the email addresses in the user admin and replace it with a 00. It wont generate an error on the BPM and it obviously wont deliver an email to the customer. Or create a few test users and give them mailboxes you can access so you can test the email templates as well. I have done both for our instance and it works ok.

If you save the shortcut as a favourite in IE and then drag it to your desktop you get the icon automatically. Make sure you right button drag and copy or you will lose the shortcut from IE though.

Hi Ralf, I raised this issue here a few days ago. Hornbill are looking into it.

Hi On the back of this... Would it be possible to implement a fail over / test instance? If we had been live with this system and this had happened we would have been unable to access our service desk for over 2 hours before a resolution was found. (which I am sure you are hearing from other customers) I can only assume that the issue arose due to one of the updates rolled out yesterday (obviously correct me if I am incorrect in my assumptions) To that end could you not roll out test instances to patch first, wait 72 hours for them to be tested by customers and then (assuming no issues) roll out the patch to live? Or provide a fail over instance which is up to date as far as just before the patch (ie patch roll out at 0100, fail over instances up to date to 0030) Being unable to provide updates or carry out work on existing calls for two hours and having to resort to alternative call logging processes and then spending time inputting the data into SM when it is back up isn't really an option for us. This is the largest of a number of issues over the last couple of weeks which would have made our instance either fully or partially unusable which makes me nervous about moving to a fully hosted solution with no fail over / test instance. Thanks Dan

Hi all, Today I am unable to log in with any of my accounts (administrator, personal or test). I get the attached error message.

Any ideas / updates? @cchana @Victor

Hi all, When setting which service to use for app.email.routing.rules.default.service.IN would there be the possibility of allowing the selection of a catalog item rather than a service as this would allow much greater flexibility. Selection such as Service Name : Catalog Item name much in the same way as categories are drilled into. And in the email rules creation page allow the selection of a BPM to be used after the Operation selection. So if the operation selected is log/update service request allow the selection of a BPM to log the service request to. I know you have email functionality in the roadmap just wanted to throw some ideas in for changes we would like to see for us to be able to utilise emails better. Thanks

+1 for this