Steven Boardman

Hi Gareth Thanks for your post and your suggestions. I can give you an update on where we currently are in respect to knowledge and what you can expect to see available in Service Manager in the short term. 1. It is currently possible to create and publish knowledge to the customers on the portals, and this is possible in the format of FAQ's. FAQ content can be created specific to the different services you offer, and therefore will be available to any customers who are subscribed to the service via the Service or Customer Portals. FAQ's can be created using the text editor, and can include images, hyperlnks and embedded video content. More information about FAQ's can be found on our wiki: https://wiki.hornbill.com/index.php/Service_FAQs 2. We are currently developing a search facility for the landing page of the portals which will allow customers to search, and see results which will be returned based on matching: * FAQ's * Known Issues * Service Catalog Items 3. Following after the search facility we will be looking to introduce dynamic knowledge in Progressive Capture for both the customers on the portal and the analyst in the user app. This will look to present relevant knowledge during the logging process, to in some cases remove the need for logging a request at all. To answer your other question, yes we are looking at options to more tightly integrate Document Manager with Service Manager to utilise the content in the documents, however we are not quite as advanced with our plans as the above, but this is an area we will be looking to enhance and your feedback and suggestions are appreciated.

Hi Tina This issue has been fixed and will be available in the next release Thanks Steven

Hi Kelvin It is important to highlight that raising a linked request is not changing the type of the original request, it is simply creating a NEW request which is linked to the original, no Service Level timers will be transferred. Service Manager provides the Progressive Capture approach to try and reduce the number of incorrectly logged requests. We would encourage the use of the 'Raise New' option which allows (with the Progressive Capture forms in the relevant order) for the analyst to ask the pertinent questions about which the customer is calling before they get to the 'Analyst Request Type' form where they can choose to raise the ticket as the appropriate type. In support of this the new Request Catalog feature, allows the Service Desk owner / administrator to define the different types of requests which users / analysts can raise against the services you offer, and behind each request catalog item you will have predefined these as either Incidents or Service Requests, again reducing down the opportunities for requests to be incorrectly created against the wrong request type as the user ans analyst will not need to make this decision or distinction. More info is available on our wiki for the Request Catalog: https://wiki.hornbill.com/index.php/Request_Catalog This is not to say that there will not still be cases where requests are incorrectly logged, and we are always looking at ways in which we can manage these scenarios, however there is not an option to switch request type and this is partly to do with the differences in data which can exist between an Incident and Service Request type, for example different Business Process, different custom questions, different custom fields, different Service Level Targets to name a few. In the scenarios where requests are incorrectly logged against a request type then there is the option to raise a NEW linked request of the correct type, but you would still need to close the original and move onto the New one to fulfil the request, or choose to close the original and raise a New request against the correct request type. However we do hope that through the use of Progressive Capture and the Request Catalog Items that these would be few and far between. I hope this helps Steven

Hi Ben In addition to the above there are a few other things to consider. 1. You can create personal views from the request list, and from the view configuration create charts based on Request Category. The Charts on your Personal Dashboard are then available to toggle between the classic list view, and the dashboard view which will show requests by category on a chart, which you can drill into to take you make to the request list with a specific category selected and the list filtered too. More info on our wiki: https://wiki.hornbill.com/index.php/My_Dashboards 2. With the introduction of the new 'Request Catalog' you can define the request items (Password reset, access issue, upgrade issues) which users can raise against the Services you offer, and you can use both the Service, and Service Catalog item columns in the request list. It is also possible via the BPM which supports or underpins each request catalog item to predefine their category for that item for category reporting. More info on our https://wiki.hornbill.com/index.php/Request_Catalog Hopefully this gives you some options to consider, but we are always happy to understand the reasons behind the requests you submit here, so please feel free to let us know if this helps or if you still have a challenge with the categories not being on the request list? Thanks

Hi Gywnne We are looking at options for the users like your manager who don't want to members or teams' as they don't do the technical work and they don't want the option for requests to be able to be assigned to them. When Teams are defined in the admin tool we have the containers for type of membership to the team - Manager, Team Lead, and Member. We will be looking at how we utilise these to facilitate requirements like your managers whilst still respecting the context of the request lists around team memberships, but this is not a current development we have scheduled. In the meantime your manager can gain visibility of the the requests across the different services by being part of a team which supports them, or by having a team like 'Management' which would again be associated to the Services so whilst no requests would be directly assigned to them they could view all requests across all services from the request list, or the reporting in the admin tool would allow them to create reports and management dashboard content across all services. We will update you when this requirement progresses. Steven

Hi gywnne Thanks for your post. •NEW: Added notifications for request owner/team members on request update from service and customer portals by end users This allows individual request owners, or the team owning a request to be notified if the end user updates the request via the portal. This is to compliment the other notification options which exist for email updates, re-assignments etc, All of the notifications options can be configured in the system settings and this is documented on our wiki on the link below. https://wiki.hornbill.com/index.php/Notifications •FIX: Services and teams are both respected when filtering the request lis The request list is context sensitive so it will only show you requests you are entitled to view. This will include requests you own personally, ones you are following, one's where you have been added as a member, as well as any requests which belong to teams you are a member of. In addition it is also possible for you to view requests which have been raised against services which your teams support. Filtering using the views builder and 'Service' and then a specific service should return all the requests raised against that service, if your team supports that service along with any other requests which are logged against that service but sit with other teams which also support that service. Setting up which teams support a Service is documented on our wiki at the link below. https://wiki.hornbill.com/index.php/Services I hope this helps Steven

Hi Samuel The above option could work if you want your analyst to set the team assignment during the logging process and using progressive capture forms, however you can also automate the assignment to the correct teams in any supporting business process (BPM). You have various automated options to assign to a team, individual etc in the assignment operations in the BPM designer, and you could even define a decision at the beginning of your business process to check various attributes of the request (from Progressive Capture) and depending on the outcomes route the request to different teams automatically. Another option could be the use of the new 'Request Catalog' which is available within the Request Configuration section of the Services. Here you can set up the different types of requests the customers can raise via the self service portal, or as an analyst on behalf of the customer and each different request catalog item can have it's own BPM defined and within that it's own BPM, you can then set automated routing rule to the relevant resolver team for each of the different request catalog items you offer. Details on the request catalog here: https://wiki.hornbill.com/index.php/Request_Catalog Hope this gives you options to consider

Hi Greg Change CH00129897 is now in development, it has been split out to first make this functionality available on the Customer Portal, so your external customers contact's will have an option to view requests raised by other colleagues in their organisations (rights permitting), we will then do the same for the Service Portal. We would expect this feature to be available in 2-3 weeks time for the Customer Portal, and therefore your external customers and their contacts. Thanks Steve

Thanks for your time today Martyn Following these discussions it looks like the proposed method of using Services in Service Manager, with Service subscriptions and the upcoming features around Service Catalog items, and extended visibility of requests on the portals based on Service subscriptions and elevated rights to see requests logged by colleagues within customer organisations should replace the 'sites' approach which was previously used in Supportworks ITSM-F. As always keep us informed on how you get on with this approach and if we can help any further. Thanks Steven

Thanks Martyn, Greg The Connections feature will enable an analyst to add contact's and or co-worker's to a request and define their relationship (interest) in the request. Once they are added, if a manual email is being sent, the analyst will see an 'Add Connections' option on the email view, and if selected the connections email addresses will be added (these can be edited, removed before sending). In addition a new BPM operation will be provided which will allow for the automatic sending of emails to connections of a request at any stage in a business process supporting a request. Following discussions with Martyn we will also be adding another BPM operation which will allow for Connections to automatically be added to requests through the business process designer - in the same way that 'Members' can currently be added as a BPM operation. This feature will follow the introduction of the Connections functionality. I hope this helps clarify what will be available shortly. Thanks Steven

Hi Greg Thanks for your post. Dan is correct the expected behaviour is to have a single customer per request. We are currently developing a new feature which will allow an analyst the ability to add 'connections' to a request. This is similar to the current ability to be able to add other analysts to a request as 'members'. However 'connections' look at this from the perspective of either other interested parties or impacted users - This change is CH135266 and is currently in development. The second part of this is giving a contact at a supported organisation visibility via the customer portal (or co-workers / basic users at in internal organisation via the service portal) the rights to view other requests raised by their colleagues (within their organisation) not just their own. This Change is in our incoming queue for development, reference number CH00129897 and will be started shortly. I hope this helps Thanks Steven Service Manager Product Management

Martyn Thanks again for the additional clarification. I understand you have a session scheduled tomorrow with one of our product specialists, and I have asked them to review the requirements with you and look at how the concepts of subscriptions to the services you offer, will support visibility via Self Service with Service Manager for the different audiences within each supported organisation. Following of this we can look at any outstanding requirements and how best to handle them Thanks Steve

Hi Martyn Thanks for your question. As you state the Site functionality in Service Manager is currently geared to model more internally focused support structures, with users and assets linked to sites. The site structure is embedded into the Service manager progressive capture and request fulfilment capability presenting itself when needed, and is available for organising queues, charts, dashboards and reporting. Service Manager is Service centric and this is an approach we have taken with other customers who provide an externally facing services / support. Through the use of subscriptions to services, contacts / and external organisations can be subscribed to the relevant services they consume from you. What would be useful to understand is the challenge you are looking to overcome with the adoption of sites into externally supported customers? If you can provide a bit more information on the challenge we can see if your product specialist who is working with you during your migration can help through existing functionality or if other options need to be explored. Thanks Steve Service Manager Product Management