AndyGilly

Is it possible to raise a feature request to get the tomorrow option added to the view creation criteria selection for a date field ??

Good Morning, any thoughts on this one please??

really great news for us, thanks @AlexTumber are you able to give me a feel for very soon?? couple of weeks??

thanks @Gerry, understood

Afternoon We are going to use Webhooks in our CMDB implementation. What’s the best way of me getting the list of hornbill outbound IPs for us to configure on our firewall ??? many thanks Andy

Morning, I would like to re-raise, or add some weight to this item please Although it doesn't happen loads, the premise that our SLA reporting is not completely accurate or reflective of the service received by our customer impacts many areas in our IT organisation appreciate your thoughts many thanks Andy

thanks @Gerry I will get the team to keep posting ideas

Hi Team, is there anything publishable in terms of functionality roadmap in the supplier mgmt. space?? a bit like the 90 day board?? thanks Andy

thanks @AlexTumber understood, we will look to plan a manual migration of data and use the tools if they end up being delivered in Jan

Afternoon we are looking into doing some project planning for our supplier mgmt. implementation. Are you able to provide information/ dates on the delivery of the bulk import functionality for contacts and contracts?? thanks Andy

sorry and @Steven Boardman Is a CI Request Type something Hornbill would consider for the roadmap?? continual improvement is a major component of any successful service management organisation

@Steven Boardman thanks Steve, appreciate the reply I guess my main challenge with using a IN or SR against a new service is that it means I would need to amend all my SLA reporting for those processes to not include this service (its about 40 or so items) lots of the other functionality sounds ideal. The types of CI items I wish to track mostly are the outcomes of major incident reviews, PIR's, our performance review meetings etc I am wondering if tasks may be better?? Can we create any reporting against tasks????

I would like to use Hornbill to facilitate our IT department Continual Improvement process. giving a centralised CI Register whilst being able to allocate and measure the resolution of these items A Continual Improvement request type would be a great help any ideas???

thanks @Conor

After going live with the new platform today we have realised that the platform does not recalculate the SLA target on the reopen of a ticket This is a pretty important capability for us & would allow the true reporting against the full ticket life cycle has anyone else previously asked for this? thanks Andy

I am trying to create a request list view for tickets that will breach their SLA tomorrow . I cannot quite find a criteria match. Has anyone achieved this??? thanks Andy

thank you @Martyn Houghton will have a read It was very much the agent interaction during the escalation function that I think would be where the value of the filtering would work. I wonder if the Hornbill team will revisit the request??

to make life easier for agents, it would be great to be able to only allow visibility of priorities which relate to the type of request (incident, request, change, problem) that has been created. Is this something anyone else has requested or something that would be considered for future development?? thanks Andy

@Ehsan thanks for coming back, yes, "This field will be visible on the form" is the tick box I refer to as hidden and the example is how we have it configured (unticked). The field is not conditional I think the important element is that the progressive capture is passing through a 'default' value of a question to the BPM. This default value is used by the BPM to make decisions but has no value to the customer. thanks Andy

Morning @James Ainsworth these settings are already active in our instance. We are using these hidden questions to pass through variables from progressive capture to the BPM, therefore the questions have an answer. any more thoughts ? or is it a feature request? thanks Andy

Could you please consider adding the ability for a question that is hidden in progressive capture to have an option to not make it visible in the questions section of the customer portal?? many thanks Andy

@Steve G that looks great for what we need. We have a look at this as we build our work flows for request automations

Would it be possible to look into an azure get info automation to support a automated business process?? The use case example is: Use an automation to look up the specified owner of an azure AD attribute. Then look to allocate that named user as the approver in an approval action appreciate your thoughts Andy

Hi Team, we at Wessex would be really keen to be involved in any early adopter program in the ITOM space, if there is still an opportunity? thanks Andy

thank you