Adrian Simpkins

Hi All So I have a test service setup with a test SLA with auto escalation rules setup currently only for priority 4 and priority 5 requests (has priorities set from 1 to 5 but I have only inserted auto escalation rules into the bottom priorities at the moment). I have raised some test requests against this service as incoming at level 5 priority, and have accepted the request then I have been monitoring for the auto escalation to trigger. I can see the movement from Priority 5 to Priority 4 along with all the associated trigger events taking place (notification to owner, manager, add to board etc). However, I was expecting the request to move up to level 3 as once it moved to priority 4 and the next set of triggers are reached, and I have just been monitoring for the next escalation. However, the requests are still at priority 4 and have passed the timing trigger point but have not moved up another level - am I correct in assuming it would move up automatically to priority 3 ? Many thanks

Hi James, thanks for the update - if someone could take a look at this would be most appreciated Many thanks as always!

Hi Dave Just another thought around this setup - I note we can send a notification to the team a request is assigned, so was trying to understand why the Owners manager is pulled from the Profile and not the team structure (we have put a lot of effort into our team setup with members, team leaders and managers so would prefer to use this as the source for a Owners manager) We were also hoping to use the Team Leader role for these escalations rather than the Manager - is the Team Leader role excluded here as well? Can you comment further please? Thanks

Hi Dave Thanks, much appreciated - I have made the silly mistake of presuming before for some configurations that affect a lot of requests, and have learnt my lesson It does highlight a need to update all our Users profiles with matching Manager to the configured teams so that is good to know in advance Many thanks!

Hi All, I am in the process of setting up our instance to start auto escalating requests and have some questions that have arisen whilst configuring the new SLA: - When we apply the new SLA configuration to the Instance, I presume the new SLA configuration will only apply to new requests raised, or will it retrospectively review an update existing requests currently under the old SLA? I was planning on making a new SLA and just swopping this over when we are ready, and I know more often than not these types of changes within Hornbill are not retrospectively applied to old requests. - Within the auto escalation options, we can send a notification or email to the Owner, Owner's Manager, Team and Specified named individuals. I wanted to understand what would happen if there is no Owner on a request (we do not currently auto assign requests to team members, all requests are auto assigned to teams within the BPMs. It is then left to team members / team leaders for assignment of requests manually so some requests will more than likely not have an owner when a trigger point is reached). Will it just ignore the configuration? I presume I would need to insert another escalation rule to send notification to the assigned Team just in case there is no assigned Owner? - is the value for the Owner's Manager taken from the individual Users profile on Hornbill, or taken from the assigned team setup (i.e. Member, Team Leader, Manager)? And what would happen if we have more than one team Member marked as Manager if this is taken from the assigned team setup? Many thanks !

Thanks Steven, I have added the new SLA to a service fine, and I have also added priorities and escalation rules, and it is attached to the Service with no issues. Must have just been some weird blip on the first one - I have deleted that now and will work with this new one Many thanks for the assistance !

Hi Steven. Yes only seeing the other 2 SLA's with the MSE prefix (the other SLA for procurement is not fully setup) However just setup another one called MSE - Testing Again and this has appeared with no issues? The only thing different in the MSE - Test SLA that I setup earlier is it has some config around auto escalation. Should I recreate it from fresh again and see what happens then? Many thanks

Hi Steven it has been created as a corporate SLA as below: Then when trying to add it to the Test Service it is not showing in the list (Can see the other 2 SLA's starting with MSE): Thanks

Hi All, Its been a little while since I have added or amended or SLAs, and today I have setup a new Test SLA to look at testing and implementing the auto escalation triggers within the SLA config. However after setup I am unable to see this to add it to our existing Services (I wanted to add it to my Test Service) - I can see the 2 old existing SLA's but this new one is not showing at all when searching. Has anyone else encountered this at all please? I could not see anything missing on the new SLA configuration when doing a side by side comparison to our 2 live SLA's! Many thanks!

thanks James

Hi All One of my Analysts has asked if it is possible to have Place on hold as an option within the Multi Select function in the Request List View - is this something that is possible at all please? Many thanks

Hi Trevor Thanks for confirming - this will allow us to tailor our approach knowing that this is not currently available. I will of course keep an eye on updates to the tool just in case this functionality becomes available. Adrian

Hi Deen, thankyou - I will raise a support call to investigate further. Its not a massive issue as only seeing the odd call but would like to understand why not coming off hold Many thanks as always

Hi all, Occasionally we have a request that doesn't come off hold when an incoming email comes back in the correct format. I have one example where I can see the outgoing email, then the request is placed on hold, and the customer responds to the email without changing title, but the request remains on hold. I have tested this on the same live service and replicated the original request setup / actions, and the request came off hold as expected once the email hit Hornbill. Any ideas why this small blip occurs ? I have double checked the Service Portfolio to ensure on hold/ off hold setup, as well as running 2 test requests with no issues on the service. Many thanks

Hi All So this issue is still occurring for a handful of our Users, and I have checked the data for this as below:- - all affected users come from the same LDAP import and the same location on the Active Directory - some users manager loads with no issues, whereas some others are failing to load the manager (when viewing the manager in the Users Profile on Admin shows as below image) I cannot see where this difference is occurring as I have 2 full Analysts both Southend Users, both with the same manager, both in the same location on the AD, and both use the same LDAP process to upload. One loads the manager with no issues, the other is showing as above. Copy of the manager create & update config they all use is below: Many thanks !

Hi Mohamed, Thank you - no worries, this will be great if resolved as I can really push the FAQs solutions to the teams, I think this issue prevents some uptake of usage at the moment, and its a great feature. Many thanks as always

Hi All I wanted to raise a couple of items that we would like to see if possible at all please : - Currently we are running our CAB meeting from the Change Board, and if a request is authorised / declined / deferred we are capturing this in the Card Board Timeline (we manually move the card item on the board as well, depending on the outcome of the CAB review). Is there anyway that whatever we enter into the Card Board Timeline against a request can be added to the linked request? So that if we authorise a request in the CAB meeting and update the Card Board Timeline this is then shown in the request automatically. Currently, we are updating the Card Board Timeline then updating the request after CAB. - Further to the above we wanted to see if there is anyway the activity on the actual change request for CAB authorisation can be shown in the Board somehow, as again we are agreeing/declining requests and updating the Card Board Timeline / dragging the card to the correct lane, then someone has to go into the actual change request to get the request up to the same point as the Change Board. I can see some items that I action in a request update on the Card Timeline i.e. moving the card item on the board, so I am hoping there is some way to link back. If there are any possible solutions for the above, or if someone else approach's CAB in a different way I would be very interested in your approach Many thanks Adrian

Hi All We are currently trying to finalise our CAB approach using a CH request in conjunction with a Change Board. We have configured our Card View so that it displays some key data in the actual Card so as to negate the need to open the whole request when in CAB. However, I was unsure how we keep these data fields updated as it moves through the request lifecycle as the data is written on the 1st card, then it just moves along the board with a card move node. Is there anyway to refresh this data each time it moves on the board at all? just in case the status changes, or the call is assigned to new owner, or the implementation date changes (I don't envisage the other data changing whilst the request is active) Or would I just insert a move card node followed by an update card node? With our configured card view it shows like this (2 images as have to scroll down the displayed data) Many thanks Adrian

Hi Armando Thanks, I did not consider the role - however if I grant this does this mean that they access to the whole service portfolio, or is it still limited to the access they have under their logon so they can only amend appropriate services? Thanks

Hi, I wanted to see if there were any options to have more than one Service Owner on a Service. Ideally we want to be able to grant Service Owner status to more than one person to ensure there is always someone who owns the Service available to make changes against it - mainly for maintaining and updating the current availability of a service if there is down time. Is this currently possible ? (was not sure if there was a setting perhaps that would amend this) Many thanks

Brilliant, thanks Steven I will take a look further - I did suspect there would be a way to do it from a team, but had not considered the custom field value. Many thanks as always

Hi All Thank you for this new feature, we have some planned uses for it. However, I was hoping we would be able to link these Notices to trigger against a User account, rather than something we add manually to a request or via the BPM . Ideally what we would like is to be able to set an attribute against the User account so that when they raise a request the Notice comes up whenever someone actions the request. (We want to highlight our VIPs). From looking at the config options, I am guessing this is not possible? We do not have a separate service for our VIPs so inserting this into the general BPM will not work and I think a manual Notice will be missed as not everyone may know who is a VIP. Thanks

Hi Daniel Thanks for confirming and for the swift response as always I will monitor for update patch in near future Many thanks Adrian

Hi I have noted that the Site in our Customer profiles is showing the numeric value associated to the Site - clicking on the number opens up the correct Site details, just was not sure why this is showing as a numeric in customer profiles. I did note there was a fix elsewhere in the system where the Site was showing as a numeric (PM00163155 - When a field is driven by the 'Get All Sites' data provider, Site's Id is shown rather than Site's name in the Employee Portal. ) Thanks!

Hi We are still seeing this occur on our New requests as it is showing the customer (Or analyst who raised the request) as the last person updated, I am presuming this is because it calls on their details to send out our 'Your Call has been Raised' confirmation email? Not a massive issue but it seems to indicate the customer or analyst has applied an update since raising Thanks