Adam Toms

Hi all, I can't see that this has been asked and I've been unable to find the information that I'm after on the wiki. A customer has reached out to us who has access a basic license and therefore only has employee portal access only. The customer has asked that they would like to be able to extract the tickets they have raised from the my requests section. That functionality is already there and does work, however unlike the IT agent portal, you cannot choose the the fields you require, it automatically downloads the extract with a set of prepopulated fields. One of the missing fields is the description. Is it possible that we need to make an amendment on our employee portal configuration to allow this field to be included in the extract? Or is this baked in functionality, that would require an enhancement to be requested. Kind Regards Adam

It looks like this is possible after doing some digging via the Hornbill Automation node, requests assets configuration. I've include a screenshot for the benefit of others.

Hi all, We're working with our Operational Technology team to create a process in our Incident flow to capture jointly owned asset information from Incidents. Our Operational Technology teams have the ability to replace jointly owned OT & IT communications assets. The incidents they we will raise will be pretty much retrospective as they have access to a joint stock pool, so they will have already replaced the faulty asset with stock from the pool. What we in IT need to be able to capture is the faulty asset and replacement asset information. So the warranty process can be engaged on the faulty asset. I have been able to achieve getting the list of assets through the intelligent capture, which means that we can get information from our asset database to do the look up but i would like to through the bpm, grab the faulty asset details and update our database to place item into faulty status, and then when with replacement asset update the database to go from in stock to in use. Is this possible? Many Thanks Adam

Hi @Ehsan, Thanks for your reply. As I'm sure you can appreciate, some time has passed since my original post. I can confirm we have transitioned over to employee portal. Some months ago now, I believe and there has been some improvements with the search since my original post. The search still can be tripped up from my experience with spaces in words for example, smartphone and smart phone doesn't always provide the results you would expect. I can confirm I did attend the recent webinar, and I can really see value not just for ourselves, but other Hornbill customers and their users also in the improvements in the pipeline. I look forward to seeing those improvements come through. Thanks again for the reply. Kind Regards Adam

Same for us

Sorry @Ehsan, It seems that we may have jumped the gun on thinking this is fixed for us. It is in the case of the knowledge centre is now pulling through the information. However it's now missing the SLA and not respecting the team assignment rules in the progressive capture. Without these behaviours occurring we cannot use this functionality as a method for call logging. Please see screenshot below. Many Thanks Adam

Thanks @Ehsan, I can confirm this is now working again for us. Many Thanks Adam

Thanks @Ehsan for yours and the teams response on this it's much appreciated. Kind Regards Adam

Hi @Ehsan, I was just wondering if you had any update on this? Many Thanks Adam

Hi all, A few members of our Service Desk team use the Knowledge Centre when raising tickets through the agent portal. It has come to our attention the whilst this finds the catalogue item then detail inputted does not get transferred and you have to fill in everything again including the request type. I appreciate the knowledge centre was always in beta but we've been using it for the past 18 months, with much success. Especially for our new starters as it makes it easier for them to get up to speed on our vast service catalogue. Some advice on this functionality going forward and whether I need to log this as a fault would be much appreciated. Many Thanks Adam

Hi, I can confirm we've spotted this, but wondered if this was part of the cosmetic changes. If you hover your mouse the catalogue item does appear. Since advising our Service Desk of this everything seem to be going fine so I'm not sure if this a fault or part of the new cosmetic changes. Many Thanks Adam

Thanks @Steve Giller. Removing all file formats from the SQL report and going into the output file formats and set .XLSX as the only file format to be downloaded from the SQL report has allowed me to get the data I need. It's a shame it can't be obtained from the asset management front end, but at least I now have a way forward. Thanks again.

Hi @Steve Giller, Unfortunately we need to pull the information out of the Hornbill Asset Manager. When pulling an extracting the data from Hornbill Asset Manager you do not get a choice in the front end of which format to download the extract from. It auto downloads this data into a .CSV file from the front, and when you change the format, to number text, or custom in the sim card field, the last digits are changed to zeros no matter which option you select. So you can no longer at that point correct the issue with the data that was downloaded. Our billing team wish to compare extracts of mobile asset data from Spreadsheet A (Supplier) and Spreadsheet B (from Hornbill) This query was raised by our billing team. They need to compare the spreadsheet provided by Vodafone which has this workaround applied using quotations, and an extract Who just has front end access only access to Hornbill Asset Manager. I was initially taken a back by this. But I can confirm I can replicate the issue. I decide to try and workaround the issue by building a SQL report as I knew that would provide options to be able to ascertain, whether this was an Excel issue or not. As mentioned we have tried PDF and we can see that when filtered on my asset the sim card number and mobile number are presented without the formatting issue. However PDF has a limit on the number of rows that can be extracted. So I'm stuck in terms of finding an appropriate resolution to this. Other than saying use Spreadsheet A, and input each sim number from Spreadsheet A into Hornbill Asset Manager Front end, and look at the details in the GUI. But this is far from ideal. Many Thanks Adam

Hi all, There is a need for us to obtain a list of all mobile assets from our Asset Management Database. We need to check this data against what our mobile comms provider Vodafone has against our mobile asset estate. I'm aware of formatting issues when pulling an extract of data which includes Vodafone sim cards which are 20 digits in length, when an extract is pulled from the Asset Management database. The last digits of the sim are automatically changed to zeros when the file is opened in Excel. This appears to be due to character limit formatting issue in Excel. If a SQL Report is built and then run as a report is run you get the option to to download this as a PDF. When the data is translated into a PDF the formatting issue doesn't occur which confirms this is an Excel issue. But due to limitation of the number of fields you can pull through using the PDF file format this doesn't allow us to obtain all the data we need. Has anybody been able to overcome this error. I'm aware of the quotation fix in Excel, but the problem is you then have to go back into the database grab the correct number and edit every single line, which defeats the purpose of the extract. If it was possible to preload the CSV before the data is inputted and then downloaded with quotation, which looking at our extract from our supplier Vodafone, seems to be how they've worked around this issue. Would it be possible to request this an enhancement? Any other workarounds/ advice would be gratefully received. Kind Regards Adam

Thanks for the update @Victor much appreciated for yours and the teams efforts on this.

@Victor and @Luke Hi Both, So this morning when i tested after the fix was pushed out I still had the issue. I re saved and published our change progressive capture and bpm this morning, we've just had our first change come in since I did this, and the user reports no issues and things are working fine. So I'm not sure whether it was a case that fix took a little while to get to our instance or whether re-saving and publishing our PCF and Change BPM has had the desired effect. But if you're still having the same issues as this morning @Luke it might well be worth trying this. Many Thanks Adam

Hi @Victor, This seems to be where my config differs slightly from Luke's although the symptoms of what Luke is experiencing appears to be exactly the same with ourselves. Our Progressive Capture writes to the following location: h_proposed_start_time and h_proposed_end_time fields. Many Thanks Adam

Hi @Victor As per @Luke's post above I can confirm it's exactly the same for us also. You can input the correct times into the progressive capture but when it's saved the times jump and our ahead during the change request being raised. However our change notification email records the correct time, but in the body of the change it's an hour ahead.

Hi @Victor We're having the same problem. I've just raised a test change this morning. As I believe the fix has been pushed out but as you can see from the following screen shots. We're seeing the hour time difference. The email notification has the correct proposed time. But the Proposed Time and Scheduled Time in the change is an hour ahead. I understand after raising an incident for this issue the fix has been pushed out but we're still seeing the same issue. It appears our progressive capture and bpm is configured very closely to the original post above.

Hi all, I'm getting lots of negative responses over this for the past week. It seem that this seems to be a recent change in functionality that they are not getting all the results coming back from the All function. I initially put this down to user error, however given some additional feedback today from multiple members of staff and some of those are in IT I can only assume that something has changed. I can't confirm or deny this personally as I don't spend that much time in the employee portal, but given the various responses from our customers it would seem that wasn't always the case. Unfortunately my colleague who looked after the employee portal, has now left. I have some knowledge of the configuration behind the portal, but this is probably my weakest point. Is there anyway I can configure the Search widget to look at Faults & Requests Only. I fully understand and appreciate Steve's response into how the All setting has been configured. For ourselves though, at this stage we've not done a great deal with the FAQ's section and for our customers it would be more beneficial if the faults and requests was populated to be configured first. Looking at the Search Widget it is possible to configure filters for the search however I'm not able to find the faults and requests configuration. I've made the attached screenshot setting in draft form, but it doesn't work as I anticipated, and I'm just trying to understand the best way to configure this in draft from for now, and then make the changes live. Could someone please point me in the right direction? I did have a scan on the Wiki but the page didn't go into detail in regards to filtering options. Thanks in advance. Kind Regards Adam

Hi @James Ainsworth Yes that's correct I can't see any filters that have been applied. But all only displays 5 out of the 6 requests for the example attached. This seems to be the case on others. But as this is returning some data, this doesn't appear to me to be a typical search fault/ issue that I've encountered before. However if you go to the faults and requests heading all 6 appear which would be what I would expect from the All Search results behaviour. Many Thanks Adam

Hi all, I've just noticed that our search results when having All selected doesn't appear to be returning all results matching the search criteria. By selecting faults and requests I see all 6 results in Faults and Requests, this is difficult to screenshot so I've not included one. But it seems for us at least, All doesn't display all of the faults and requests that should appear. However changing to Faults and requests yields the full results that what has been displayed in all. Does anyone else notice this or have I missed something in a change to functionality? Many Thanks.

Thanks @Ricky For the speedy response back. At the moment were exploring and I'll be honest I don't fully understand all the technical parameters of communication via the domain we're looking at. But some of our technical team have looked into this and believed that due to the nature of the security requirements and it's very restricted access that communication via proxy might be a viable option from our Information Security and Network Teams. Hence reaching out to see if this was something that was now possible. As mentioned above this is just an idea at this stage we're exploring at the moment but would be great to understand a timeframe from the development team on communication via proxy. Kind Regards Adam

Hi all, We're exploring the idea of looking at a secondary Hornbill SIS server to handle automations in another domain. After reading the following wiki article: Site Integration Services - Hornbill Currently support for communications via proxy service is not available. I note that page was last updated in September 2021. Is this something that is now possible? Is it possible to provide any further information on this? Many Thanks Adam

Thanks @Steve Giller I didn't think of it as an authorisation task as essentially it's been authorised by IT. But I see what you mean if the email was actually an authorisation for the area of business that doesn't have access it would work how we would need it to do, and then this would allow the flow to resolve the request upon acceptance. I hadn't looked at it, like this. Thanks again for your help and quick response. Kind Regards Adam