AlexOnTheHill

I don't think it's pedantic to point that out at all, I probably oversimplified the point I was trying to make. You're absolutely right that stakeholders would need to agree what counts as a first response. I think what I'm trying to highlight is that it would be helpful if we could have a suspend node which allows for the inclusion of any/all of the first interactions rather than the current mechanism which only allows for one method. A human task seems the workaround for that. My challenge with human tasks is agents familiarity with that workflow and the volume of activities that would generate as they would necessarily be generated for all requests. I think a suspend node which would wait for an event to trigger the response timer must allow for any type of response unless stakeholders agreed x type of request will only be dealt with by email or y request is only dealt with by phone call and that doesn't really match with my experience with dealing with requests. I will propose we look at human tasks and ask that the option to select multiple conditions be considered for an enhancement.

Thank you Alex, I do have a further question about timesheets and that is around reporting: The in built reports do not allow the manager to get a list of calls associated to a particular category, for example. Calls can only be viewed if they select a daily view. How can a manager report on which requests have used which categories over a longer period? I have looked at creating a report but timesheet IDs are not mentioned in requests and request IDs are not mentioned in timesheets, is there another table I can use to bridge the two?

Thank you Steve. I'm glad I understand things correctly. While a workflow can dictate what counts as a first response I think agents will always consider that any response is a first response, be it email, call or simply the notification that the request is assigned to an agent. I am aware that colleagues have fashioned a workaround where they have set either an activity or custom button to define a value which marks a first response so I may explore that option. I would still like it considered as an enhancement request that the system allow any first response to mark the first response timer.

Just checking in, could someone advise whether what I am looking for is possible?

Sorry, yes, I am aware that the search in the request list where you can create a custom view does allow us to see this. I have shown my colleagues how to use this too. I still think a date filter would help with the search results in the top search box.

Hello, While searching for relevant requests in the search box in Hornbill I have noticed that I can only filter by Owner, Customer, Type, Service and Status but not by date. This would be particularly useful to help with identifying calls within a given timeframe - eg during an outage or after a change of process. I am aware that this can be achieved using the custom view however this would be useful within the search box too. If there's something I've missed please let me know. Many thanks

Any advice would be helpful

Just checking in, any advice would be appreciated

Is this proposal possible? I think this is something that many workflows could benefit from.

Hello, I have users looking to implement Timesheets and I have received a request from management for clarification regarding the permanence of the entries recorded. There is a concern that once the entry is created it could be amended by the user or a colleague after it is reviewed by management at the end of the week/month. I understand that there is an audit history so we could see what changes are made any by whom but do we have a way to lock completed entries? I have looked for clarification in the wiki but cannot see an answer, I also cannot see whether someone in the same team with the Timesheet Manager User role is able to edit a colleague's entry. I would also like to know if there is a limit on the number of categories that can be created. Many thanks in advance, timesheets are a subject that did not come up during our onboarding and now there is interest in using the feature management are looking for some reassurance regarding the robustness of any figures they may use coming from them.

Would it be possible to propose this as an enhancement request please?

Thank you for this, I have given this method a try and it returned one result while I have been able to locate seven workflows that assign to this team so far. Is there an accurate way to report on this information?

Hi, I have been presented with a piece of work to remove references to a specific team within our workflows. I have been trying to think what would be the best way to go about identifying those workflows through reporting. Is there a way to look at the team ID/team name within workflow tables? Is it better to look at request timelines and look for the specific phrase "The request has been assigned to the [insert name here] team by the Business Process Engine" and if so, how? I have tried the latter however the filter only has 'like' not 'contains' Any help would be great. I'm keen to not let this piece of work become larger than it needs to be and this report would give me an idea of scale.

Would it be possible to advise whether what I have proposed is possible? Could it be considered as an enhancement request or is there a way to achieve this with the system as it is? I have asked about the reason for email/call response and it is very much on a case by case basis, I could make a custom button perhaps but the ability to say mark first response if a phonecall or email is sent would make more sense, I feel.

Apologies for the delay in getting back to you, I will find out what the decider is here, perhaps you're thinking that I can factor that decider into a decision node in the workflow which is a good idea. I will see if that is something I can do with the team. I think the team most likely need me to look at the possibility of having a suspend node with multiple conditions - ie suspend pending email, phone call or email not suspend pending email, phone call and email. I would imagine having that facility would greatly help users mark a response.

Any recommendations would be appreciated, thank you.

Hello, I have a team who would like to mark the response timer based on when an email is sent to the user. In principal this is quite easy and I built the workflow with a suspend node, stage checkpoint and response timer set when an email is sent. In practice this isn't quite so easy because not 100% of their emails require an email to be sent and any request that doesn't have an email sent will not get a response timer. I cannot set two suspend nodes in series as that will require both a response and an assignment, I cannot set the suspend nodes in parallel as parallel nodes require all conditions to be met. How am I able to suspend pending email or assignment, whichever is first?

Hello, This is a query that has come to me recently and I do not have an immediate response for. Is there any way to measure self service interactions which do not result in a request being submitted. For example, number of users who follow a capture to partial completion, number of clicks on the various options. Is that information available? Many thanks

Hello I have received a request to remove a team from our instance and ordinarily this would be a straightforward matter however this team happens to be at the top of a hierarchy of teams. If I were to proceed I presume I would need to recreate the teams outside of that hierarchy with the same name and members. With that in mind I have a few questions: 1. Would the new teams need to be created before the old ones are removed so that all assigned work can be reassigned to the new team? 2. Would all the workflows that point to any of the teams in this hierarchy have to be updated or would the name be sufficient? I have thought about the consequences: new teams would need to be re-applied as supporting teams for each of the services, any reports that use the Team ID would have to be corrected and custom buttons visible to any of these teams would need to be amended but is there anything else I have not considered here? It may be that I can remove team membership and remove the team as a supporting team of all services so that it becomes invisible as a workaround but if the deletion is still necessary I thought I'd reach out before any action is taken. Many thanks in advance.

+1 for this

Hello, I have a request to produce a report which shows the subscribers of each of our services. I can see in some instances this is a large list. Is this possible to do through reporting or database direct? I had a search through the forum and found a post from 5 years ago with a database direct command but it produced no results. Any help is appreciated

Hi Steve, Thank you for continuing to look into this. This complication already exists with the current calculation, the difference here is that if we start a timer we know where on the working calendar we are to account for working days which have different durations. My thoughts are that this would require a more complex calculation, perhaps if the WTC defined per day what each organisation defined as a day it would simplify matters ie Mon-Thu, 8:30-5:30 (1WD) Fri 9:00-4:00 (1WD) Sat 9:00-12:00 (1/3WD)

While developing a new set of SLAs I encountered the necessary calculation to work out the correct number of days and was able to revise my count of hours and days accordingly. Given that we already define what a working day is can we add the ability to see the number of days based on our working hours? When talking through the new targets for each of the priorities and request types it is hard to tell what any figure means without additional calculation. I presume the reason for this is that users may be operating on different working time calendars but I still think there should be a way to link the two.

Thank you @Jim this looks very useful indeed, every day a school day was never truer!

Hello, I have been asked to look at the possibility of notifying Team Leaders when a request is logged as a High priority. I have explained how I would be able to do this within a workflow but there is a risk that the notification would not be sent depending on where the request is in its flow. For example, if a request were reopened and reprioritised it would have moved past the point where the priority was checked. I could similarly create a button for High Priority which defines the priority but also emails the Team Leaders with the details of the request. I have suggested creating a custom view showing all high priority requests, I have also suggested a daily report email flagging high priority requests. Are there any more elegant solutions for this where I can say whenever the prioritisation is set to high regardless of where a request is in the flow that the team lead gets a Hornbill or Email notification? Updating the workflows would be a large piece of work to undertake and still have the possibility of reprioritised requests not generating notifications or indeed counter to that, incorrectly prioritised requests generating too many notifications. Is there anything here I haven't considered? What would the recommended practice be here?