Foley Coker

hi @James Ainsworth - i've worked with martin on this, and this is the part of the workflow in question. if multiple suspend nodes cannot be used in parallel, is there a way to be able to keep the master ticket from closing, until the splintered tickets, be it 1, 3, or 5 different linked requests are completed or some sort of indication of completion such as a timeline update? we currently want the one ticket logged by the customer to not immediately close, but also need it to splinter into various teams based on their choice within the intelligence capture, and those linked requests may meet completion at different times due to being sent to different teams.

hi @Steve Giller this has worked for us. thank you

Hi, there is a report i have created that fails every time to send to the intended users. I am presented with the below message, but i have automated reports that work for me. do the intended recipients need any specific roles in order to receive reports via email, as i cant see any difference between this and other ones made.

hi all, this seems to have since been resolved, and ive been able to access the site.

Hi all, is there a current issue with the success site https://success.hornbill.com/hornbill/ has been giving me a blank screen all day and i am unable to report a current issue.

@Ehsan will this update be widely released to all clients? and will this resolve those for already raised tickets, or just newly raised tickets after the patch? as we have been experiencing the issue also and the workaround is not suitable for all instances where the date visibility is necessary. Thanks, Foley

@Victor - would it be possible to be added into this, our data protection team who utilise the platform have some questions.

@Dan Munns hey Dan, thank you for the response. It was clear to me haha, Unfortunately we had tried that as one of the solutions as well, and that for some reason was still picking up the previously selected authoriser, rather than giving the user the authorisation key to select a new one. I felt it may have had something to do with a get request info, possibly referencing previously stored data on who the authoriser was but im not entirely sure.

@Dan Munns Hello Dan, i am revisiting this post as i have come to bit of a standstill regarding the re-authorisation. In the below screen shot, we are attempting to place an expiry on the authorization node, and when reached it goes back to the request owner to select a new authorize. However when we initially tagged it to the first suspend await authorize, it would not provide the authorization key again but just set the authorization to the previously selected authorizer. We then built it as below with a different suspend node to then feed back into the auto assign authorization but yet it is still picking up the originally selected authorizer. Please can you advice how we can achieve this as the wiki did not provide much clarification. Thanks

Agreed, this is something that our organisation could really use, as the bottle neck in pushing the approvals, for short notice leave, or long term leave is causing hold ups.

@Mohamed Oh brilliant - thank you will look out for that.

Hello All, We currently have a number of processes utilizing the automation for authorization, with the data query in the procap set to co-workers alone, and then using the raw value for the authorization node to send an email to the selected person. This in theory would work well as our cost center managers would all have a collaboration license for this purpose. Although there is the ability to use external authorization with an email input, this extra level of protection was deemed more suitable. However, in practice, it appears that the data query in the procap even if set at co-workers is allowing the customer to select basic users. The selection works when a actual user with the license is selected, but it should not present the basic users. This in turn causes the request to fail every time it reaches the authorization node as there is no collaboration license for the basic user. is this a known error, or is there something else we can do to ensure they are only able to select the collaboration licensed users through that data query? Thank you, Foley

Thank you @Steven Boardman Look forward to the update!

Hello All, we are currently utilizing the time sheet application and the wiki shows information that appears to possibly not fully be relevant any longer / or ahead of its time. This is in relation to categories. We can only view one role which is TimesheetManager User. This role gives not only the use of time sheets, but also all the other relevent features of admin like creating/deleting etc.. Unfortunatley for staff to use time sheets they also require this role, which creates the fear of unwarranted edits/additions and a lack of protection for other members if viewable by all. The wiki says there are time sheet Timesheet Category Manager & Timesheet Administrator which would add different levels to the roles, but this is not available on our platform.

Thank you Steven missed that one

Hello Team, When creating a view and adding custom fields to create custom collums, this only goes up to custom field O. Are there any plans to or a way to add P,Q,R,S,&T to this, as we want to utilise this as an exportable criteria from views. Thank you, Foley

Hello All, we are experiencing the same issue at our organisation. Reading the above thread, the work around of saving an attachment and uploading it to the email works, but we cannot use the associated file as this does not send an email out, instead just making a post. The ones affected were raised after the date above, in February. Is there any update to this issue? Kind regards,

Hello Gareth, we are experiencing the same problem. It follows the routing rule, but bypasses the routing rule template aside from the designated team. For us this is raising an incident call with no workflow as default rather than the service request call that the routing rule template points to in the service portfolio. I am unsure as to why this has occurred, as this has been working as intended up until a day or two ago.

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

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

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

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

Thank you for your help, all good and working as expected. regards, Foley

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

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