Jump to content

Foley Coker

Hornbill Users
  • Content Count

    30
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

About Foley Coker

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Oh no, oversight on my behalf, looking for a way to remove the attachement now. Thank you for the information, does this mean if i were to use HTML font coding rather than wiki mark-up within the autorisation node information, this would apply in the email? I am not overly familliar with the concept so doing some research as we speak also. Kind regards, Foley
  2. Thank you @Martyn Houghton & @James Ainsworth This is extremely helpful. I think we will have to release more information regarding the statuses and assess through management observation of the dashboards, i.e. equal allocation of work. I will speak with out Lead on Hornbill here, in regards to possibly reducing the idle time, but you are right it may cause more hassle for users than benefit. Foley
  3. Hello Team, I want to inquire on the specification on how the system treats automatic allocation when offline users are disqualified. I currently have the setting for the round robin allocations to not include offline users. However i am getting reports of users being assigned requests days after they have logged off the system i.e. during the weekend, or on off days. Is this affected by single sign on status? as in if they log off the laptop does that still leave them logged into hornbill but inactive. due to potential manipulation of work allocation, we are avoiding releasing further information about changing their status to any off the other categories such as do not disturb etc.. which the wiki says is also classifies as offline. Many thanks. Foley
  4. Hello Team, I am wondering how to get the emails produced by the authorization node to replicate the font changes as placed when setting it up. It appears to work from the analysts side, however not on the email produced. Please see attached email for further explanation of the issue. Kind regards, Foley Approvals.msg
  5. Thank you for your help, all good and working as expected. regards, Foley
  6. Thank you @Steve Giller, when the service has been placed as retired will the active requests still be able to be actionable by analysts? as it states this will be hidden from support and subscribers of the service
  7. Hello, I have been in the process of launching a new service which is the amalgamation of 3 previous HR services and an update to the catalog items. The calls already logged in the previous HR service are still live, so i have retained the subscribers to the services, but disabled the service requests catalog and the service visibility. This had the unfortunate consequence of not allowing the customers of the previous service areas requests to view the customer side to the request. Is there a way to disable the service visibility but retain the ability for customers to still see their active calls? Thanks, Foley
  8. @Victor hello Victor please ignore the above, issue has been resolved. It was the wrong catalouge that was updated, so changes being made werent being seen on the right request.
  9. @Dan Munns thank you this has been helpful to read. @wfmike please let me know when ready
  10. Hello @Victor thats what i thought but the nodes before it are request info nodes which essentially require no action this is the set up. The stage checkpoint is the last thing to seemingly activate and what should happen next is the activity. so thats why the issue was pinpointed to be the nodes, one for get procap information and one for get owner information. any advice on what could be wrong?
  11. Apologies this might have been my fault in explaining the initial issue to @Stuart Torres-Catmur. @Victor from my understanding of the explanation given above, is that each get request info node can have its own unique reference, and at any point it is placed in the bpm and referenced it is drawing from whichever request info is present at that point of that reference? allowing for multiple streams of separate information to be pulled at different times? Currently, in the BPM Data Protection Data Breach v3.0 (Draft) The human tasks that appear after the get request info node, when selecting owner for tasks with the unique output reference from the get request information, it still is not loading the human task when the request is made for the analyst. when populating it automatically came with a reference, but when i look at preexisting get request info nodes in other BPMs previously built, the reference is blank. I have tested it with a blank reference also, but still to no avail. the latest is IN00133148 from our service.
  12. @Steven Boardman Hello Steven, Is there a build or function that needs to be made live for the co-worker variable? as we are not presented with that option
  13. @Steven Boardman Hello Steven, Thank you very much, the latter option i think is the best as they would be internal users, i hadn't thought of that possibility in the email node for co workers. Will test this out now.
  14. Just to confirm this is in order to eliminate having to do the below.
×
×
  • Create New...