Steven Boardman

Hi @Graeme Clark, @DeadMeatGF The issues with using the Close Status option after a Human Task Expiry and the use of the Close After a Period of Time operations will be fixed in the next Service Manager build, which should be available next week. Thanks Steve

Hi @nasimg Sorry yes this should be visible on 935. Just to check, this feature is for Service Requests only, was it an SR you checked against on the Service Portal? or an Incident? Steve

@Tina.Lapere If you use the LDAP tool as @Dan Munns has suggested this is probably the easiest way to apply this if you want to apply this to all users. In the admin tool, on the role if you add one user, you can continue to add additional users into the box and then once you have all the required users you can then Save and this will add the selected users in one action, rather than adding them one at a time and pressing save and repeating each time. Steve

Hi @Lyonel We will look to update the role to Service Desk Admin, rather than Admin which has the rights along with the owner of a Service, to change the owner of a Service. Once this is implemented and available i will update the post. Hopefully this will make it easier operationally to manage the owners of services. Steve

Hi @Everton1878 Just to come back on a few of the questions in the post. 1. We don't currently have the concept of delegates for approvers i'm afraid. 2. Authorisers need to be either a named individual / or a variable but groups are not supported. 3. You can use the Get Request Information (Request Details / Questions) node ahead of a branch node, to evaluate say the Priority, custom questions etc to then branch to different nodes which contain different sets of approvers based on it being (High, Medium, Low etc). Considerations. 1. As shown in your screenshot, we have recently introduced the option of an Owner for authorisations, this provides a little flexibility. * The Owner can complete authorisations which are assigned to other users * The Owner can reassign the authorisation to another user (when it has been spawned by the business process) * The Owner could be set as a variable (owner for tasks) to allow the owner of the request to alter the approvers if needed once set 2. As with any other sort of task, you can set Expiry as a valid outcome for the authorisation, so if the original approvers do not make there decision within say 24 hours (because they are away) then the authorisation task could follow an Expiry branch and this could lead to a second authorisation node which has a different set of approvers - This does not address knowing who is away but it may be something to explore 3. We have a change in our to do list which will allow the required approvers to be manually populated from the request before getting to the approval node, this has not been started just yet but it is scoped and i can update here once this is in motion. I know the above may not provide an immediate solution to your challenge, but i wanted to provide some information on the current capabilities, some options to consider and what we also have planned Steve

Hi @Everton1878 Depending on if you are supporting internal users who use the Service Portal, then you could go to the Role in the admin tool and then the Assigned Users tab, and use the Multi-select User option for adding the required users to the role, rather than adding the role onto each individual's profile. If you are supporting external contact's via the customer portal, then you would need to go to each Organisation which you support (in the user app), and open the Portal Access option under the Request section of the organisation's record, and for those contact's who have Portal Access, slide across the Can Cancel option to enable this on the customer portal. Steve

Hi @Dan Munns Can i just confirm that the Email Customer Rejected email is sent? If so we know it is branching correctly. I have tested the closure category, and cancellation operations and they seem to work as expected One thing this maybe given you are testing - and i am going to assume you are logging the requests through the user app, and then opening the request details after progressive capture, is if you have async option enabled? If that is the case, it maybe that you are opening and viewing the request before the BPM has had a chance to carry out the operations i.e Get info, update summary, assign, evaluate user, send email notification, update closure code, change status. A couple of ways to test this, as it appears the email is firing is to F5 the request details to see if that then shows the correct Cancelled Status, or if you are logging a new one, get to the last PC form, hit Finish, and then wait say 15 seconds before clicking View to open the request details Would it be possible to try this and let us know either way? Steve

Hi @Lyonel Thanks for posting on this. We are looking to introduce Release & Deployment into Service Manager, and the first step towards this is to have the Release Container. So in the initial release in Service Manager, you can expect to see something very similar to the existing Change Container, so the following * Release Form * Services extended out to allow the defining of Release Request Configuration (comparable to Change) * Ability to define Business Processes against your different Services and Profiles for Release * Ability to link Changes etc to the Releases * Ability to raise Releases via Progressive Capture * Request list and view filters for Release Requests * Extend out existing Progressive Capture forms and Business Process options to cater for the new Request Type. After the initial release, we will be looking to follow it fairly quickly with a Release Calendar. In parallel we are also working on defining the relationships between linked requests so you can understand which requests are say causing or fixed by etc when linked to a request / Release We have also in the last Service Manager update released the ability to automate the resolving / closing of linked requests so will provide the ability to automate say closing Changes linked to a Release. As Gerry has posted elsewhere on the forum we are also exploring what Orchestration / Automation we can offer / integrate with and this is an area which we will be able to update on in the coming months. I hope this gives you some information about what will be available initially and areas we will introducing in the coming months. Steve

Hi @Everton1878 @Terje Mognes There will be a new Automated Task node option added to allow for changing the status of the Service linked to the request. This will allow you to automate the changing of the Status when a new issue is identified, and for you to ensure that it is reset to either No Status or Available once the issue is resolved / closed. As this will be a new node option you can include this where ever you need in your processes. This will be available in either the next or following Service Manager updates, so expect to see this available in the next couple of weeks, be sure to check the release notes for these update. We are still investigating the options around the publishing / un-publishing options. Steve

Hi @DeadMeatGF Yep changes to the translation string values would be global. I'll raise the requirement to in effect have configurable display text on default forms in Progressive Capture, so as you say it can be different when the same form is used in the same or different Progressive Capture flows. Hopefully as you say you have a solution for the here and now, we'll feedback here with progress in this area Steve

@lee mcdermott just to add to Bob's comment above, we will be releasing the ability to automatically create additional Incident or Service Request's automatically / directly from an existing request from the Business Process Engine, and these of course can be assigned automatically to different teams / analysts. The advantage of the task approach Bob mentioned above, is that on the completion of the task (outcome defined), the Business Process can be automatically progressed. We do also recognise the requirement some customer's have to create additional request's at particular points in a business process and as such, the new functionality to create an Incident or Service Request will be available in the next Service Manager update available in the next two weeks. Hope that helps Steve

Just to add to James comments, you will also need to consider the following: Contact's will need to be enabled with the rights to do this on the Customer Portal You can enable this via the Portal Access control as shown below, per supported organisation. On the Service Portal, customers will need the Self Service Request Cancel User role in order for them to see the option to cancel Service Requests Steve

Hi @DeadMeatGF You can make some basic changes to the text displayed on the default forms, as each label is a translation string. If you have the rights to use the Translation Mode you can simply enable this in the user app and navigate to the text you want to change (highlighted in green), if you right click on the text, you can change this to what you need. You can also edit these in the admin tool using the following translation strings: Home > Service Manager > Translations user.view.pcapture.site.customer.title - Lefthand side user.view.pcapture.site.prompt - Righthand Side If you are referring to the portals, then this translate mode does not exist there, but you should have access to the translation strings in the admin tool to make the same changes to the displayed text. These two translation strings maybe the one's you are interested in for the Service Portal. guest.com.hornbill.servicemanager.portals.servicePortal.pcapture.site.customer.title guest.com.hornbill.servicemanager.portals.servicePortal.pcapture.site.prompt Hope that helps Steve

Hi @Dan Munns This is a new feature under an experimental flag, and is documented here on the wiki. https://wiki.hornbill.com/index.php/Service_Manager_Experimental_Features You will need to turn on this feature, and then you will see the existing roles, where this application right is then enabled. The Role Advanced Request Task Completer is not needed (it should not be showing in the admin tool), and is not used to control this feature. Sorry for any confusion caused, we are looking at getting this removed. Thanks Steve

Hi @yelyah.nodrog Hornbill doesn't have security identification questions as a specific feature, but there are a few things you could try which may work you. I'll can suggest a couple of things to see if this would give you what you need. As an administrator who has the rights to use the Form Designer on the User's Profile view, you can use the Design option, and add a new field or fields to any of the profile sections (renaming the label and type of field as needed. The key thing you need to do, is untick the box which says Show this field in the form You can then go ahead and save the changes by pressing Apply, and then Apply Changes to save both the fields and the form. If you wanted to you could also untick the The field cannot be edited option as well, but if the field is not shown this should not be important. Before you hit the Apply Changes button the field will be greyed out and this indicates it will not be visible once the changes are applied. Once the changes are applied, when you view the user's profile you will not see the field, even if you go into edit that particular section of their profile. Now that you have a field or fields for this information, you would need to go about importing / updating the information for your user's which you wish to hold in these fields. Now you could do this manually through the admin tool and the user's profiles, or if you have this information on your directory services you might want to include it in your nightly update to populate the fields. This information will be visible to administrators who have access to the admin console, and have rights to view the users via the admin console as follows, but i am assuming you are going to be ok with those level of users having this visibility (Home > System > Organisational Data > Users > About Tab on the user profile) Now moving on to making this information available to your service desk staff during the request logging process for security / verification purposes. Now as i have earlier, Hornbill does not have a security / verification feature specifically but what you can do is choose to display the custom fields from the users profile on the Customer Details Progressive Capture form, so that when a customer call's in the service desk staff can see the security information about the user displayed, and they can ask for character x or y which they can visually confirm based on the customers response. To add these fields to the above form, you need to go into the different Progressive Capture flows you use, and the Customer Details form, and if you click on this form, you will see the options to add Additional Display fields here you want to add in the attribute fields which hold the security information. Remember to save and activate your changes. When your service desk staff now log a request using the progressive capture form, this is what they will see, including the Security Information field which i added to the users profile on the right hand side information about the user. Obviously do be aware that whilst we can hide the field from the user's profile, we are then holding this information in the database against the user's profiles, so user's who have rights to the advanced reporting options / admin functions in the admin console would potentially have access to this info (This information is not accessible through the views, charts and personal dashboards in the service desk / list views). I hope this helps and give you at least an option to consider? Steve

Hi @m.vandun Against each organisation record, you can navigate to requests > Portal Access and then use the slider to decide which of the contact's for the organisation (who have portal access), also have the rights to view their organisations requests. Hope that helps Steve

Hi @Lyonel There is some additional information on the wiki - Services page relating to the use of the Owner field on services, and the controls around this: https://wiki.hornbill.com/index.php/Service_Details Scroll down to the Owner section, this should explain the behaviour. In essence, if an owner is assigned to a Service, it is only the owner who can can change ownership to another Services Manager User. In the event that you need to change the owner (say they have left the business), then if a user have a role which gives them access to Service Manager, as well as the Services Manager Role, and they have the Admin Role, then they will be able to change the owner - but this is really designed as a last option, should the owner not be available to transfer ownership of their service. I hope that makes sense. Steve

Hi @DougA Sorry you had this issue yesterday, this has been fixed and you should not see the error now, and you will be able to save your business processes without the need to use the tentative approvals. Please let us know if this is not the case Steve

Hi @Martyn Houghton The Service Level Agreement and Service Level Target Name fields will be added to the Request List column selectors. We have an update for Service Manager due out in the next few days so it will not make this update i'm afraid, but it will be in the following one which should be in the next two weeks if not sooner. Steve

Hi @Everton1878 If you Follow a request, you will receive notifications regarding updates to the request both in your notifications and your newsfeed - would that help? If you wanted to be notified as requests move through a defined business process, you could add either connections (customers), or members (agents / collaborators) to the requests, and then use the business process options to email either or both sets of interested parties at trigger points in your process. But it sounds to be like the Follow option should do the trick here? When your done following, you can simply unfollow the request, in the same way that you followed it. You also have a default view on the request list for the requests you are currently following Steve

Hi @DougA It is possible to use the answers from custom forms in Progressive Capture in Email templates. In order to achieve this you would need to map the answers from the PC Custom forms into the custom fields of the request, and then use these fields in the email templates. There is some information on the wiki which explains: (a) How to map custom form answers to custom fields on a request (b) How to then use these custom fields in an email template. https://wiki.hornbill.com/index.php/Progressive_Capture_Designer - See Mapping fields from customised forms section One additional benefit of this approach is that it allows you to retain the original answer in the questions section, and then if needed allow for the answers to be updated in the details section of the request forms. Hope this helps Steve

@Dan Munns Could you share your query which sits behind this widget? Are you specifically referencing the statuses to include or exclude? have you factored in any cancelled statuses which might not show on the request list view? Hopefully your query will shed some light? Steve

@yelyah.nodrog It looks like you have this set up correctly and using the percentage sub query with your 'Yes' custom answer. This is the same logic if you wanted to create a percentage measure which was looking at Incident SLA percentage Resolution performance, you would use the h_witihnfix = 1 in the Percentage sub query as shown below.

Hi @Awalker No problem putting a chase on this one, it is a story which we want to implement and hopefully this will not be too far away now, but it has not started yet. It is 100% on our to do list and has support from other customers so is high on the list to do but i am afraid at this point i can only say i will update you as soon as this is moved into our incoming queue, at which point we will be able to commit to delivering it within the following 90 days. Steve

@Dan Munns Unfortunately the data visible would have been added today by a user playing with this, but it is not part of the standard demo data, which is refreshed every evening - so these will not be there tomorrow i am afraid We are currently working on revising how data is populated into the sandbox instance but this will not be available immediately. In the meantime please feel free to review the example videos on the wiki and post for any advise / examples you are after and i'm sure we'll be able to help that way before the demo instance is updated with lots and lots of examples Thanks Steve