Bob Dickinson

Hi @Adrian Simpkins Try the following: <span style="color:red;font-size:16px">'''Your Text Here'''</span> I just gave this a test with and without the bold formatting (and a slightly bigger font size) and this works in the progressive capture: Kind Regards Bob

Hi @Mark (ESC) These can be changed in the Translations in the Admin Tool (Applications --> Service Manager --> Translations) The ones you need are: "It's working!" - guest.com.hornbill.servicemanager.portals.servicePortal.home.requestView.details.resolve.working "It's still broken" - guest.com.hornbill.servicemanager.portals.servicePortal.home.requestView.details.resolve.broken "Your request has been resolved" - guest.com.hornbill.servicemanager.portals.servicePortal.home.requestView.details.resolve.completed For example: Kind Regards Bob

Hi @Mark (ESC) At present we do not have the option for a customer to reopen a closed request from the portal. This is as per design. As best practice we recommend that organisations employ a two stage closure approach: Resolve the call - and then check with the customer to see if the request is ready to be closed (or set an expiry period for it to Auto Close after X number of days). When a ticket is in a resolved state, the customer CAN reopen the ticket via the portal Close the call If the customer then wants to reopen the request, the advice would be to re-raise as a new ticket. It's very difficult to accomodate the reopening of closed requests in the Business Process too. There needs to be an end point in which the BPM has finished, and that is typically on full closure - reopening it afterwards means you fall outside of any process, and lose any automation benefits. Kind Regards Bob

Good afternoon All, It's been a bumper Q3 in terms of delivering new Service Manager functionality, and Team Hornbill has developed plenty of new features/enhancements covering a wide range of areas. If you missed any of these at the time, please take a look at our Quarterly Summary for a round-up of all of these new features that are available for you to configure today! Here is the latest Q3 2020 edition: https://wiki.hornbill.com/index.php?title=Service_Manager_Quarterly_Update_2020_Q3 For links to our previous quarterly updates, please check out the Whats New Wiki Page

@Jeremy Yes this is how I would see it working - some type of additional attribute to add some filtering criteria based on the type of thing you've mentioned. I know from past requests that this is quite a tricky undertaking. The most simple way to add new options in this area is to add a new pre-defined option to the existing list (e.g. "Search Coworkers, Search Basic Users" etc) - but that wouldn't really work in this scenario because we would need some user defined criteria too to perform the filtering on, and there is nothing currently in the Admin tool UI or back end that accomodates something like this, so it's unlikely to be a quick piece of work. But I'll feed this back to the developers and see if we can at least get the discussion restarted to see what options are available.

Hi @Jeremy The introduction of brackets after a user name was brought in purely to solve a specific issue - to distinguish between two people of exactly the same name (rather than to provide general information as part of a dropdown list_. Although this information may be useful as per the reasons you have described, it would result in the same issue - i.e. there could be two people called Joe Bloggs (Student) in your list. Whereas the User ID is unique so it will always be some kind of distunguishing information. I do not believe there are any plans to expand this out in that format, but I will raise internally and see what the developers thoughts are. There is certainly something to be said for adding some filtering options to the User Picker list. Kind Regards Bob

Hi @Alisha Thanks for your time on the call earlier. Just to round this off for anyone who is following this thread, the issue was that a number of requests had been Closed - but their Business Processes had not been completed. This typically can happen if using the bulk update function to resolve/close requests, when their Business Processes are expecting additional actions (for example awaiting an owner). Because of these processes were still ongoing (despite the tickets showing as closed), it meant that they weren't showing on the report I created - and the reason you could not delete the Business Processes had been completed. What I advised what in the Admin Tool to navigate to "Applications --> Service Manager --> Business Processes" and click on the "Manage Executed Processes" button. From there you can search for the Business Process name, and see all tickets that are currently using that process and it's ongoing. From there, you can review each request and cancel the Business Process(es) for the closed requests. Once there are no longer any active processes against requests, you should be able to delete the Business Process as originally required. I hope this helps! Kind Regards Bob

Hi @Alisha Can you send me a copy of the report with your amendments and I'll take a quick look for you Kind Regards Bob

Hi @Chibamba No problem, hope we can help. You can compare dates in a report - you simply need to know the dates you need to compare and you can use the Against Table Column Value operator in that part of the filter to select another column to perform your comparison against. It's a little complex to explain, so I have created this report for you to have a look at and you can amend as you please (e.g. you might want to add some more columns or filtering). To upload onto your instance, simply create a new report and click the green button in the top right corner The report to download is: resolvedclosed-tickets-updated-by-autoresponder-since-closure.report.txt Let me know if you have any issues Kind Regards Bob

Hi @Alisha Glad the last report worked for you. Thats a good question, as it can be difficult to quickly establish which requests are stopping a Business Process from being deleted. I have attached a new report for you to try which should show you: All tickets with a status of "Resolved" that are using a Business Process with a version that has since been updated If you still can't delete the Business Process after identifying and closing the tickets, it may be because there are tickets that has a status of "New", "Open" or "On Hold" as well - in which case the reporting filtering would need to be slightly amended to view those too. I hope this helps Kind Regards Bob resolved-calls-using-older-process-version.report.txt

Morning @AndyGilly Yes this has been released and I can see it's been applied to your instance. The output you are looking for is called Service Domain - if you open the Get Request Information --> Service Details node, you should see it in the output list: Kind Regards Bob ***EDIT - Sorry I noticed I named it "Domain Name" in my mock up screenshot above....this is probably what caused the confusion, my apologies!

@Martyn Houghton No problem. The outcome for ALL nodes is used and should always have a value once it's been processed (to see what is recorded, you can use an "Update Details" or "Update Timeline" node place directed after the node you are testing, and inject the outcome into the description/timeline of a ticket to see). The issue is (as you reported) that some nodes - such as task assignment - also error is they fail, and are not elegantly ignored/bypassed. This is node specific, so in those scenarios a decision on the outcome isn't going to be of use as the BPM has already errored anyway so you can't continue. Kind Regards Bob

Hi @Martyn Houghton There is another option that might accomodate this which could even be used in conjunction with the above. We have a "Get User Groups" node - which can output up to 10 groups (relating to a specific defined type e.g. Team, Department, Company, etc). You could call this node, and feed in: User ID: The user ID you are evaluating Group Type: Team And off the back of it, you would have a decision node, with the criteria something like: IF Organisational Group One = 'Data Consultancy' OR Organisational Group Two = 'Data Consultancy' OR Organisational Group Three= 'Data Consultancy' OR Organisational Group Four = 'Data Consultancy' ETC... ETC... This way, again you are checking that the User ID is a member of the group before trying to assign the task to them. If they aren't, then you go down the No Match route, which is however you want to deal with that. Again, I appreciate this isn't as elegant as what you desired in your original post but it should be possible logically to achieve today Kind Regards Bob

Hi @AndyGilly Although not specifically what you have requested, with the Service Manager update that will be applied to all customer instances tonight you can achieve this with a small update at the start of your Business Processes: You firstly would add a "Get Request Information Node" - and ensure to select the Task "Service Details". From tomorrow, one of the attributes that this will return is the Domain associated with the service. Then you would follow it with an "Update Custom Field" node, where you would pick a Custom Field and inject the domain name. This way, you would have the Domain stored against the h_itsm_requests table for every ticket that is logged from that point forwards. It's not as ideal as having this occur by default in it's own dedicated column - but this is a simple way to achieve the same result for easier reporting today, without needing to wait for the change to be approved and implemented. Kind Regards Bob

Hi @JoanneG The items beneath "Account Management" in your screenshot are known as the Catalog Items - and these can be reordered manually when configuring a a Service. It may be the case that someone has changed the order (even accidently) when looking at the service. It's quite simple to fix this though - as you can see from the screenshot below, to change the order, you need to navigate to the Service Portfolio, open the Service, and click on the relevant request type - and you can simply drag-and-drop the items into the position they should be displayed. Hope this helps, let me know if it's still an issue after they have been placed in the right order in the Service Portfolio, Kind Regards Bob

Hi @Martyn Houghton The issue with a graceful fail here is either you could easily end up potentially with a task without an assignee/team OR the task not being generated, which would mean the BPM loses some of it's integrity - and could cause confusion for all parties. The solution here is to perform the "User Validation" BEFORE you create, and assign the task to them - and this is something that can achieved right now. You would simply pass your User Variable into a "Get User Details" node - which looks up and sees if this user exists on your system. This DOES fail gracefully if it doesn't find a match - and if it doesn't find a match, the resulting User ID from the output of the node will be null (and then you can perform whichever decision logic is required). Below is an example using Checkpoints based on whether the User exists: And the Get User Information node can be found here: Kind Regards Bob

Hi @James Gallally Thanks for sending me the definition of your BPM. The reason you get the "blank" connection is because it hasn't been able to find the user it was supposed to associate. For connections to work it requires the User ID - and if you are passing values directly from the Progressive Capture from a Coworker data provider, the User ID is the Raw Value so this is what you need to map when setting up your BPM. At the moment, you are passing in the display value - which is the users display name (e.g. Bob Dickinson, rather than BobD). So for example where your string currently is: &[functions.pcf("userconnectionsinterested4","field_1")] It needs to be: &[functions.pcf("userconnectionsinterested4","field_1_value")] I was able to replicate your issue simply by uploading your BPM in it's current state - but after adding _value to some of the "Add Connection" node mappings for a test, it fixed the problem. I see you mentioned you had tried this - but could you try it again, and have another try? If it still is failing for you after updating all the nodes, please feel free to send me the updated definition and I'll take another quick look. Kind Regards Bob

Hi @HHH @Martyn Houghton I see the requirement you have, but unfortunately there is nothing I can currently suggest with would feasibly allow a process to bulk send a huge number of emails. The only option we have available to send to more than one recipient is the "email external address" which allows multiple addresses with comma separation. So in theory, you would need to achieve that. The issue with a "get service subscriber" style node is the fact that there are so many different types of subscription method. Whilst you are refering to contacts, you could have a combination of Contacts, Users, Teams, Departments, Sites etc - with different data structures holding the email address in different places, and the potential for duplication too if one user/contact is a member of more than one of the teams. So it's not an easy thing to collate, let alone to then present all the emails in a format that the existing functionality could accomodate. I'll ask internally, but the development teams have a large backlog of requests so it may not be something that would be available in the short term. It sounds like it would need to be a new requirement and properly scoped by our development teams. In the meantime (and it's by no means ideal) but if there was a way of configuring a distribution list via a single email address (outside of Hornbill) then that could easily be configured to be called in a multitude of ways using logic based on whichever criteria you like. Sorry I couldn't be of more help here for that scenario! Kind Regards Bob

Hi @HHH We don't have any functionality to be able to get a list of Service Subscribers and do anything with it. As you may have seen with Workflow in general, a "list" of anything is typically unable to be used dynamically - hence why I needed to come up with a workaround as per the above suggestion, where a defined number "List Items" can be set and the workflow logic can run through and perform actions for each list item it finds. It's long winded but it does work. So in your scenario there still might be a way around this - but only if you have a relatively small number of contacts that you were looking to associate. Would you be able to provide me with some more details about the specific scenario? Kind Regards Bob

Hi @AndyGilly The description is one way (though it may be difficult then to extract that specifc cost from the description, and input it into an approval). Another nice way is to include it as a custom field in the Progressive Capture. In the below screenshot, I have created some basic information about the Item and an Image (using Wiki Markup) using a label field. And I have added a Single line text field to display the cost. You could include the questions you want to ask the end user beneath these To set up the cost here, I have used the Default Value to record the price, and made it read-only to ensure that the it can't be amended. Then the clever bit - I have mapped this read-only cost attribute to a custom field (in my example h_custom_m) in my request. That means the cost of the Item can then be injected into any subsequent emails, approvals, tasks etc. Hope this helps Bob

Hi@Kelvin As @Deen mentioned, there isn't a way to display this through the standard interface, but you can use a report get some counts of this information. I have created and attached an example, which counts all messages with a date (Either sent/received) from the start of whichever day it is run. This is grouped based on the folder the message resides at the time of running. Upload this to your instance (let me know if you have any issues with this) and see if this provides some of the data you require Kind Regards Bob email-counts-from-today.report.txt

Hi @Alberto M To change this, you will need to use the translation string user.core.home (Quick tip - in the translations screens now, you can actually search the string you are looking to change. So in your example, I searched "Company Home" on the Translation Strings page and it returned all results that referenced that text. Makes it a bit easier to ensure you have covered all areas if making any changes ) Kind Regards Bob

Hi @Philip Hanlon Unless you are looking to report on a combination of tickets raised relating to assets (including departmental information), the department that you have being recorded in Custom D is not really going to useful, as it's obviously dependant of tickets being raised. By the looks of things, this report actually should have no relation to Incidents/Services requestss and is actually an extract of current assets, associated to users and you need to also include their departmental info. For most of our customer, the department of a user is stored against their User Profile, within the "Organisations" tab: In terms of the DB - these associations are help in a table called h_sys_account_groups, and the group information itself is in a table called h_sys_groups. I have attached an amended version of your report with these to tables joined, and some additional columns being displayed on the output. A couple of things to keep in mind: You may need to be care with the Joins - if you come across a user who is associated to an Asset, but for some reason DOES NOT have a department, then the row may not show in the report, so this may need some tweaking Conversly, in Hornbill we actually allow for users to be members of multiple departments. If this happens to be the case in your business, the report will show a row for each department they are a member of so it may look like duplicated data. I hope this helps as a starting point, Kind Regards Bob asset-by-user---ph.report (1).txt

Hi @Philip Hanlon Many thanks for sharing your approach with the community on the forum, hopefully that will help out someone in the same position. Ideally we would record this information at the point in time, so it could be easily reported upon - we have some changes in the pipeline, but as with all feature requests, they need to be reviewed and prioritised accordingly so it may not be available in the very near future. I am working on a potential workaround to gather this information and report on it within Hornbill at the moment. If it works, it's certainly not a pretty solution, but it might be one way of gathering this info without needing Power BI. I will post back here if it works, and is a feasible approach (as a stop gap until we introduce some dedicated functionality). Kind Regards Bob

Morning @Ann Sorry for the delay in getting back to you on this one. Unfortunately at present we don't have the option to add to the State or the Operational State fields. These are not driven by Simple Lists and are out of the box options. As you mentioned, Sub States are available however and they can be used against one of the 3 default states (Current, Active, Archived). You can create these yourself, and manually update assets - or the substate can be updated from a bulk import mechanism too, such as CSV Import or our Asset Data Import utility. Substates are configured in the "Manage Asset Types" menu, and more information on them can be found here: https://wiki.hornbill.com/index.php/Asset_Types Kind Regards Bob