George Zippo

Hi @Nanette Thanks for this. Although we have a workaround for editing articles I am not able to retire articles that are no longer relevant to our Services (I am reluctant to delete) Do you have a better idea now on when this might be resolved?

Just adding that I noticed today this did not affect a new FAQ that I created, just ones that were created before some point in the past.

Just bumping this one as I keep getting asked about this internally. It would be great to hear back from the product/development team

Thanks Steve, Just checking back to see if there was any news on this particular enhancement request.

Hi Steve, Appreciate there is lots going on as usual - I wondered if there was any further updates available on this item?

+1

+1 from us too (Gareth added his +1 to the other thread)

Hi, We are starting to develop plans to utilise Supplier Manager and we would find it really useful if you could associate Services, like you are able to with Assets, to each Supplier and Contract. This is because we use technical Services rather than assets where we do not have direct visibility of underlying supplier assets (rather than creating a dummy asset). Similarly it would be useful if the integration with Service Manager and with 3rd party (on-hold) to create Events would recognise those relationships as it currently does with Assets.

+1

Hi, It would be great if in certain circumstances we could use the BP to prevent our agents from changing sub-statuses manually, like we are prevent certain actions from being available: For example we would prefer to not allow an agent to set the Sub-Status to 'In Progress' when there is no Owner Assigned. This would be similar to how we prevent the Resolve action not being available without an owner. Has anyone else achieved something similar or would this be considered an enhancement/new feature request?

+1 in terms of wanting our customers to be able to close their requests when they are no longer required without requiring our request owners from expending more time than necessary on these, however with acknowledgement to the following: Some Service Owners may not want this enabled and therefore we would need this to be configurable at a Service level not Globally. We should be able to report on these closed requests (ie retain visibility of the information available at the time of closing by customer) This is available for Incidents and Requests

Our agents would find it really useful to quickly identify Services Statuses via the explorer view. As an example if I am working on a request and I navigate to the explorer: Cloud Hosting could be set to "Impacted" or "unavailable" but I cannot see that from this view. It would really add value if I could immediately see the Service Status of linked services by some kind of symbol or colour coding. This is similar, but not the same, as one of the items in this thread where I mention the details section would be a great place to capture some additional key Service information:

Similar to the Asset action where you can quick filter assets based on their relationship with the customer or the customers location it would be useful for us to have an ability within the Linked Services action to: See only Services that have a relationship with the Service the Request was recorded against. Search only Business or Technical Services (dream) It would also be fantastic to be able to launch the explorer and select a Service from that view to populate the field that way This would make it a lot easier for our staff to get best value from the work in defining those relationships

Hi, We would find it useful if from an agent create new request function view you could start typing to refine the available services. Although the Service Category filter is useful it would be ideal if there was a search box which searched for words in the Service descriptions too as our agents would have a greater chance of selecting the right service especially where our employees use aliases and other key terms often not contained in the Service name when communicating with us. This would be similar to the ability to search for Services in the Linked Services action within Requests.

+1 We are hoping to be able to compare usage of the Hornbill Portal with historical data from other tools previously used by our teams (IT and NON IT) to understand if usage is up or down after the transition. Similarly, in the future we want to encourage other teams to onboard into Hornbill and such information would be a useful to aid those conversations. + other reasons listed by other above.