Michael Sharp
-
Posts
665 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
8
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Enhancement Requests
Posts posted by Michael Sharp
-
-
Hi all,
Is anyone having issues when editing documents in Edge? I'm having to use Chrome at the moment as I can't carry out many of the functions e.g. insert row does not work, the save button does not work etc.
Regards,
Mike.
-
Hi Brian,
We have the exact same process with our company and have used custom progressive captures, simple lists and automated emails to the supplier to service these requests. The email responses then feed back into the ticket automatically. Further to this, we explored the idea of this ourselves (went down the route of dummy operators, contacts, custom priorities etc.) but we went with option 1 and marked the ticket as either Open (i.e. awaiting feedback) or On-Hold to represent awaiting a supplier to arrive, the closed once they had resolved the fault.
p.s. I'm sure Bob stole my idea on option 1 as this wasn't suggested by Hornbill when I raised this
Mike. -
Thanks very much Ehsan - that's great.
Regards,
Mike.
-
On 01/08/2016 at 7:40 PM, James Ainsworth said:
Hi Michael,
The implementation of the questions in Progressive Capture has been focused on the quick capture of information to initiate a request being raised. I'm assuming that you are using the multi-line text box in the custom questions to capture an implementation plan. This field was really only created to allow a for a multi-line response to a question and is sounds more like you are in need of providing something more aligned to a document with formatting for the implementation plan.
It is possible to include the adding of an attachment as part of progressive capture, but you will find that the attachments would be included in the printout.
Have you considered adding information about the implementation plan after the change has been raised? What I commonly see is the progressive capture being used to gather information for a change proposal, then once raised the process workflow takes over to manage the acceptance, planning, testing, and release of the change. We use a proposal stage within our own workflow where we review and accept/reject change proposals that have been submitted. If accepted it moves to the next stage where a number of tasks are allocated for things like implementation plans and reviews before moving to the actual implementation of the change. We record our implementation plans within the description of the change where one can use wiki markup for headings, bullets, and other formatting. This formatting is printable using the request print option. As the updates to the description are added to the timeline, so you can also collaborate on the implementation plan within the timeline and even see the changes made from the previous version of the description. Using the BPM for initiating the adding of an implementation plan also allows for more flexibility such as using logic where an emergency change is required it may bypass the standard implementation plan and go down another route.
Regards,
James
Hi James,
Another thought I've had, is there a way to configure this so the actual question is in bold and the answer in plain text and the "question" and "answer" are not visible and separated by carriage returns? This would be aesthetically better in my opinion.
For example displays as:
Which Files are you trying to access?
I need the recording from the Glover case from Mondays meeting
Which Colleague?
Sue LangRegards,
Mike.
-
On 05/08/2016 at 10:24 AM, Michael Sharp said:
Is it possible to report on requests while grouping or filtering by user's department (AD or Hornbill group)? I want a report to show all requests raised by all departments as well as a tally for each over a given period.
Regards,
Mike.
I have now figured this out for myself - bit disappointed this topic was not responded to despite the amount of views!
-
This actually worked perfectly for me thanks!
Mike.
-
I have an issue with placing tickets automatically "on-hold" during stages of a ticket. Please can someone help me out with this? Workflow as follows:
Request Details -> Human task (error when completed) -> Checkpoint node (completes fine) -> Automatic Email Notification (sends fine) -> BPM1 (attached) -> BPM2 (attached) -> Authorisation node -> Decision Node
Regards,
Mike.
-
Hi James,
We managed to service this by inputting an external reference number and pre fix where third parties are involved on requests. This seems to service our requirements so we will go with this I think. Thanks very much for your input however - it would still be useful to know how contacts can access tickets as a connection however?
Regards,
Mike.
-
15 hours ago, James Ainsworth said:
Hi Michael,
Thanks for your post.
Users, which include both standard users and basic users, are really for people that are internal to your business. A Basic User does not require a license and it does allow you to assign requests, however, being that they are still classed as an internal user, I wouldn't recommend using these to represent a 3rd Party.
By default, Hornbill does provide Organisations and Contacts which are directed at entities that are external to your business. You can create an organisation for your 3rd Party and add one or more contacts to that third party.
After adding an organisation and at least one contact you could consider some of the following
- Add a custom field to the organisation to flag it as a 3rd Party
- Using the Connections feature, you can add a new connection type called "3rd Party" and add contacts belonging to your 3rd Party organisation as a connection to the request
- As a contact, someone from the 3rd Party could access the customer portal to see the outstanding requests
- On the organisation form for the 3rd Party you can add links to their published Service Levels if they provide them to you via a URL
- Add a custom field on a request to allow a support person to flag it as a 3rd Party issue.
- Use the Category tree to categorize a request as being a 3rd Party issue
I would suggest starting with defining what you need in your report and work backwards to help determine which of these settings work best for you.
I hope that helps,
Regards,
James
Hi James,
Thanks very much for these suggestions - I hadn't appreciated there were other ways to service this. In regards to the contact and connections feature, that sounds like something that fits our purpose. I'm not sure how they are able to log into our system to see the updates however? Further to this, ideally we want to filter the requests (rather than run the report) for a particular third party however there isn't a "connections" filter on the view? If we have to run a report to get this information then that will have to do.
Further to this, I'm not sure how to implement or find options 1, 5 or 6? I have found custom statuses however can't see an option from within the request to set a custom status as an analyst?
Regards,
Mike. -
Is there a way to report or filter all queries that have been referred to third parties? We want to be able to run a report or filter on requests so an overview of their service levels can be monitored and also reviewed at account meetings. An idea we had was to create a user and assign them to a ticket however as you can appreciate we don't want to pay for a non-collaborative user that will not update our systems - the updates will be added by the internal team here. Perhaps a virtual user type could be created to service this unless you could suggest another way?
Regards,
Mike.
-
On 08/08/2016 at 11:23 AM, Ehsan said:
Hi Michael,
Thank you for your post.
Users can view requests, if they meet one of the following criteria:
- My Requests - Requests that are assigned to the logged on User.
- I'm Following - Requests that you're following or simply, those where you've pressed the 'Follow' button on while viewing the request details page. Doing so provides a User with any new updates to a request on their News Feed.
- I'm a Member - Requests that the logged on User has been added to as a 'Member'. This is usually, where and when an analyst feels that another member of the organisation could assist with or is interested in receiving updates on the request.
- All My Teams - Requests that are assigned to all the Teams that the logged on User is a part of.
- All My Services - Requests that are associated to Services that are supported by the logged on User.
- Each Team that the logged on User is a part of.
The other option for exploring a unique set of requests is by creating a View (which I believe you are already aware of) but that would require you to be able to uniquely identify a set of requests by a common piece of information.
In your scenario, I would suggest that your IT Director and the Training Team are added to the list of 'Supporting Teams' of Services that they're interested in (unless the Services in mind are already supported by all teams). You could possibly create a new Team and associate your IT Director to this Team. In summary, I am afraid there isn't an option to view ALL of the requests that are raised within the system.
I hope this helps?
Thanks,
Ehsan
Hi Ehsan,
Thanks for your response, this worked for me (Supporting Teams).
Regards,Mike.
-
On 09/08/2016 at 11:44 AM, DeadMeatGF said:
Aside from the actual view, surely prioritising Partners should be done by assigning the appropriate SLA at the point of logging, not by looking through a list of calls and checking their names ?
Thanks for your response - are we able to set SLAs based on who is a member of a group in Hornbill? Or by user's job title?
-
Thanks Ehsan - I think the "supported by" option is the most suitable for our scenario. I'll test this.
Mike.
-
10 hours ago, steven boardman said:
Hi Michael
Just following on from Ehsan above.
Are you looking for different information about the request to be displayed in the list, rather than having the ability to create personal views to accompany the default views and view creator provider?
We are always looking at ways we can improve the user experience on all our interfaces so welcome feedback, and use cases.
Thanks
Steve
Hi Steve, I think from a technician's point of view, the ticket reference is much less important than who the customer is and when it was logged. For that reason the preference would be to show the customer and raised on fields instead on the main request view?
For example Partners of a company are going to be prioritised when browsing through the list, as are requests that have been raised the earliest.
-
Excellent, thanks James - working perfectly!
-
1
-
-
Is there a way for someone to be able to view all content on the request list without being a member of the teams? Our IT Director wants to be able to view all tickets however does not want to be included on all of the tasks assigned when assigned to teams. We also have another member of the team (training manager/their assistant) that may review requests periodically but will maintain their own task lists - these would not be part of the technical teams ideally.
-
Is there a way to customise the request view on the mobile app? Our analysts don't care too much about the ticket number, more who has logged the call, when, and the summary.
Regards,
Mike.
-
We are also interested in a scheduled call facility. This is important for checks to be carried out by our staff for example on the second Wednesday of each month (the day after Windows Updates are released), we have a member of the team check and deploy the updates to a test group for example. Another example we have is a daily morning check (rota basis) carried out by the team where we log on and test everything is up and running across the firm before staff arrive into the office.
-
Is it possible to report on requests while grouping or filtering by user's department (AD or Hornbill group)? I want a report to show all requests raised by all departments as well as a tally for each over a given period.
Regards,
Mike.
-
Hi Ehsan, this is if we have received an email to our personal account which in fact should have gone into the Hornbill system?
Regards,
Mike.
-
Unfortunately this is still the case, I am able to edit tickets as System Admin
-
-
Please note since the upgrade this morning to Service Desk, our analysts are not able to log, amend or close calls. Please can you look into this immediately.
Regards,
Mike.
-
I would strongly agree with Martin - this feature has to be available? Even if the post has a mark on it to say the post has been edited? Further to this, it is very easy to post updates on the wrong ticket if you work with multiple tabs which we would want to avoid.
Cost Value on Reports
in Service Manager
Posted
When we run a report on purchase price, we are presented with an additional 12 zeros on the end of each price. Please can you advise if this a fault with the system or our configuration?
Regards,
Mike.