DRiley

Hi Steve, I tried leaving that field blank and the BPM got upset . I'm quite sure there was some built in behaviour, potentially governed by an application setting which cleared the substate on resolution. I was looking for confirmation on whether that was true or not. I can't find a setting myself. Thanks, Dan

Hi Team, I've noticed that if I resolve a request via a business process workflow (using the Update Request > Status operation) the last sub-status is is maintained against the request. I seem to recall there being something that would clear the sub-state on resolution, perhaps an application setting? Does my memory serve me right, or has it never worked like this? The rationale for this behaviour is that many of the active sub-statuses are only relevant when the request is open, but more importantly they reflect a particular state in the life of the request. The sub-status may only make sense when read in the context of "open", but when the request is "resolved" the sub-state quite frequently doesn't hold true and hence should be cleared (especially when it isn't attached to that parent status). Thanks, Dan

Thanks James

+1

Hi Team, the following question has been posed to me from one of the service delivery teams at our organisation, they suggest that when looking to put a ticket on hold, the predetermined time options for selection appear to be "all over the show”. Just going off this screenshot there doesn’t seem to be any kind of consistency, unless we're missing something. So we were wondering what the logic was and how this component determined the time options it presented? Thanks, Dan

Thanks guys, that's what I was looking for!

Hi Team, can you tell me if there's a BPM operation which I can use to either add a user to a Hornbill group or subscribe a user to a service? I'm looking to temporarily give visibility to a user while the ticket is active i.e. add the user as a connection, subscribe them to the service so that they have visibility, then unsubscribe the user at the end of the process. I figure I could achieve the same by adding a user to a subscribed group and then removing them from the group. Are there any operations I can use to achieve this? Thanks, Dan

+1

We were impacted by this update too. One of our teams doesn't use resolution/closure categories either and having a category level set down to the maximum levels in the service configuration provided a solution. Hornbill insist that something has been addressed so that things work "correctly" in relation to this setting. However, if you refresh you browser the mandatory message disappears. That new behaviour Vs a previously logical (and reliable) approach to the situation makes the "fix" hard to stomach. It's as if someone saw the description of the application setting and took offence. One might think it was easier to caveat the description of the setting. The motivation for this "fix" is a little baffling. The lack of an alternative to support the preferences of different business areas on the platform, or any commitment to fill the gap in capability which has been created, adds more frustration to the situation. It's not often I throw my toys out of the pram, but this one has created back-lash for us too.... and on a side note, I'm still waiting for an update on my escalation in relation to this. In my opinion, setting the resolution category before the ticket is resolved is not the right approach. Secondly, what are we meant to set it as, just a generic one? I'll have to review my category-related reports to exclude such a value as its essentially acting as a placeholder for those teams where the category isn't of any use. Dan

Hi team, a question on activities, specifically the situation when one is assigned to both a user and group. I'm looking for clarification around who can reassign, edit details, and delete in this situation. The wiki (Activities - Hornbill) states that "Group & User - if the activity is assigned to both a group and user, then the owner of the activity is able to reassign it". Is this correct? One might think that this situation would result in a combination between group only and user only? I'm not prescribing a solution here, it just seems strange that only the owner can reassign in this situation. Thanks, Dan

Hi @yelyah.nodrog , I hope you're well. I have a report that looks at feedback received maybe this definition will help? You'll ned to tweak the filter and columns included but sounds like it might have the join you need? Dan customer-feedback---feedback-received.report.txt

@Keith Stevenson thanks for clarifying. Is there a wiki page, or other resource, which outlines the features of the enterprise edition? Just so time isn't wasted in future. At times its hard to know what's intentional Vs unintentional in the product. Understanding this area would likely save my time and the time of Hornbill's Support team! Thanks, Dan

I can see it in the search results, but when I click on it I'm taken to the "users" page Thanks, Dan

Hi Team, I believe there's a table which captures an audit of logon/log off actions and I can see from the wiki that there is an interface where this information can be viewed and filtered: Security Audit - Hornbill . However, I can't seem to locate it in Hornbill configuration. Where can I find it or do I need a particular role to access this view? Thanks, Dan

@ssimpson following the Service Manager update, we experience the same situation as you. Within the service configuration there is a category specified down to its maximum level, effectively acting as a default closure category. This approach was taken as the setting of a closure category is not relevant to this particular (non-IT) business function using Hornbill. Having a category set in the service configuration supressed the mandatory closure category prompt. This behaviour seems pretty logical. It appears other Hornbill users have been employing this approach for some time too: https://community.hornbill.com/topic/18412-resolution-category/?do=findComment&comment=88220 What's interesting for us is that if the user refreshes their browser, the mandatory prompt disappears allowing the resolution of the incident in the usual fashion as per before the update. Dan

Thanks Steve, Sam, yeah, I was aware of the back-tick being an escape character. I've only been manipulating anything to the right of the = sign. I also tried, startswith(model, 'iPhone') but this returns all device records which is rather frustrating. Perhaps the same result you experienced Sam? Either way, thanks for confirming your findings. I wondered if there was a special way to use this operator that I was overlooking, but seems not. Thanks again guys, Dan

Hi All, I'm curious to know if anyone has had any experience filtering InTune devices using the "startsWith" operator in their InTune asset import runbook script? I'm referencing the Microsoft documentation (here: Supported filter device properties and operators in Microsoft Intune | Microsoft Learn )but not having much success. I appreciate this document is referencing the rule syntax editor in the InTune so I adjusted slightly to go in the script. Unfortunately the result is a "Bad Syntax" response from InTune. Here's the resource I'm using in my script: "https://graph.microsoft.com/v1.0/deviceManagement/managedDevices?`$filter=(operatingSystem eq 'iOS') and (model startsWith 'iPhone')" Any pointers would be appreciated. Thanks, Dan

Hi All, I've given my user the roles "Knowledge Manager" and "SM Knowledge Manager" (still unclear what the difference between these roles is at this stage). I can see options in Hornbill configuration to manage article types, perform a migration of existing FAQ's, and set keywords. However, I can't find where to create new Knowledgebases and topics. Can anyone point me in the right direction? Thanks, Dan

@James Ainsworththanks. It looks like h_buz_activities will certainly be a means to an end! For the analysis to be meaningful we'd be looking at many requests. I've filtered my report on post type (assign), date published (when the timeline was updated with the assignment action) and added criteria on actor (the users I'm interested to see their comments) but as you can imagine this has returned all assignment actions, including those without a comment and many generic "The request was assigned by the business process engine" type of assignment posts. Being able to simply isolate those assignment actions that contained a comment and exclude those that didn't would be really useful. Can you (or anyone) help with additional filter criteria to reliable way to achieve this with the records in h_buz_activities? In the absence of anything else I can resort to some further processing in excel. From an enhancement perspective, having a comment column in h_itsm_request_team_assignment would make life easier as you could simply add report criteria to return records where the comment was not empty. It would also allow you to understand the assignment to and from alongside any assignment comment, giving more context. Thanks, Dan

Hi Everyone, there's a report available in the Service Manager In-App Reporting area called "Team Reassignments". According to the wiki description this looks "to see how many requests have been resolved by the first team that they were assigned to. This can help to identify the performance of your 1st Line teams and if they are successfully resolving requests without having to rely on reassigning to another team". In it's default form, what criteria is this report using to determine the percentage of Reassigned Vs the percentage of not reassigned? Thanks, Dan

Hi, we're looking to gain more insight into the reason why tickets are reassigned between teams. I know that the assignment comment can be made mandatory using the service manager setting guest.app.requests.assign.commentMandatory. However, I have a couple of questions: 1) Where is the assignment reason stored? - it doesn't seem to be in h_itsm_request_team_assignment (which would be the most logical place in my opinion). To analyse the reasons in conjunction with the different types of requests, we'd need to extract them in a report. 2) Less of a question, more of a comment - it would be great if the agent could select from a list of reassignment reasons. Currently the comment is free text, some pre-canned selections would make this more efficient for the agents and also reduce the variability of comments (and help eliminate the inevitable "." - full stop - comment!). Thanks, Dan

Can someone explain the difference between the two roles "Knowledge Manager" and "SM Knowledge Manager"? They appear to be exactly the same, which one should be used? Thanks, Dan

I can see a .png (or at least it says it is) in there showing the same symptoms, however there's also instances of (what appear to be) the same image and they display fine, certainly in list view: Seems consistent when in tile view (I assume the others look odd because of some situation with the scaling for the preview - another thing I noticed). Focusing on the image in question, the dynamics logo, I went to a website and converted the .svg to .png and then uploaded. This is can now be used. If it is due to the image type, it would be useful to understand what image formats the image library supports. I forgot to ask, is there a wiki page with this? Thanks, Dan

Hi Team, I've uploaded an .svg image to the image library in Hornbill but I'm encountering problems.... I can select the image via the "add image" popup, type a description and click add (as shown) Seems OK. However, upon adding the image, the preview shows a broken image icon: When adding to a links widget in the Employee portal I also experience the same: What am I missing? Any guidance would be appreciated. Thanks, Dan

@James Ainsworth I hope you're well. The "Full Access" role variants allow agents to reopen tickets. They also grant the "Advanced task completion" capability for the user. In my experience, these are the actions that usually need to be possessed more broadly among a team. Having the "full access" roles overriding locked actions (something that typically needs to be more selective in terms of who can do this) often conflicts with the need to reopen tickets and complete other peoples tasks. I hope that helps, Dan