Jump to content

Martyn Houghton

Hornbill Users
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    4,028

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    86

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Martyn Houghton

  1. Martyn Houghton
    @TrevorKillick, @James Ainsworth Are there any plans in the backlog to add Password Expiry process? Cheers Martyn
  2. Martyn Houghton
    @David Hall Just wondering if you where able replicate the issue or if you need any further information? Cheers Martyn
  3. Martyn Houghton
    Just wondering if this is being considered and how other sites are getting around the sub-status not being set when updating existing requests. Cheers Martyn
  4. Martyn Houghton
    @Ehsan Thanks for the prompt reply. I keep an eye out for the release announcement. Cheers Martyn
  5. Martyn Houghton
    @Steven Boardman Wonder if there has been any further consideration of deploying 'sites' within customers. We are having more of our external customers who are joining up into shared services and the requirement to have a single organisation and have multiple sites within it has come to the fore again. For example where an external organisation has created a shared service, we have the requirement for some customers to see only their request, some to see their 'sites' request and some who need to see all the 'organisation' requests. At the moment we are having to create separate organisations for each 'site' effectively. Cheers Martyn
  6. Martyn Houghton
    @Mohamed Just wondering how this is progressing? Cheers Martyn
  7. Martyn Houghton
    @andrea_bariggi This is something we raised as well, as it would be a really helpful option. Cheers Martyn
  8. Martyn Houghton
    @David Hall @James Ainsworth Had not realised that you had to add a rule at the Service Level to select the Service Level Agreement first. I had added the organisation condition in the Service Level Agreement rules, not the Service. Now I added rules to select the Service Level Agreement into the Service, it is now selecting the correct Agreement and Level as required. I am presuming that I would no longer required the organisation condition at the Agreement level rules. Cheers Martyn
  9. Martyn Houghton
    @m.vandun Would have thought the mail address would have come from the members profile/account. The settings below will determine what email template is used and the notification type would allow you to disable the emails, i.e. set to hornbill only, whilst you investigate the email address issue. Cheers Martyn
  10. Martyn Houghton
    @m.v Mark We are having the same issue appears to have shrunk following the recent Service Manager Builds. Could do with it being to grow to at least double the current size. Cheers Martyn
  11. Martyn Houghton
    @Ehsan The issue with branching on the existing organisation id was me and not the system. Cheers Martyn
  12. Martyn Houghton
    @James Ainsworth We would also be interested in this as an option as well. I presume the node would have to expire based on the value set in the service feedback expiry days? Cheers Martyn
  13. Martyn Houghton
    I am having an issue with getting the BPM Application>Timer>Start Response Timer, when a service has multiple Service Level Agreements assigned to it. My rules are based on the Priority being set and the organisation matching, i.e. I have two organisations using the same service but have a different SLA. Even though the organisation matches the rules in the second Service Level Agreement, the first one listed in Linked Service Level Agreement is selected rather than the second one which would match both on priority and organisation name. The BPM then fails as it has incorrectly assigned the Service Level Agreement, but is not then able to select a Service Level as the rules do not match. It appears the Start Timer node is only taking into account the first linked service level agreement and when it is not able to find a match in the rules from that, does not then go on to evaluate the rules for the next linked service level agreement. Cheers Martyn
  14. Martyn Houghton
    @Gary@ADL We have raised this as well, see post below. Just one thing to be aware that 40 days in the service level targets will translate to 960 hours (40 x 24hours) of duration against your working time calendar associated with the Service Level. That is fine if your service level is 24/7, but if you are working on 8 hours business working hours say that would translate to 120 days. Cheers Martyn
  15. Martyn Houghton
    @Gary@ADL I believe there are plans to support subscriptions down to the catalog level , which would allow you to control access to individual catalog entries within the single service thereby reducing the number of services you have. But at the moment the FAQ's exist at the Service Level, so there is no relationship to the catalog level, therefore I think this is what you would need to happen to support your scenario. Cheers Martyn
  16. Martyn Houghton
    @SJEaton Sam If you hold down the CTRL key then click on the nodes, they should then be highlighted in orange hew along with there connections. You should then be able to Cut/Copy the selection into the clipboard. Then change stage and use the paste option. Cheers Martyn
  17. Martyn Houghton
    @SJEaton As @DeadMeatGF mentions, the customer/organisation forms are skipped when logging a request via either the Service or Customer portals, as it inherits the details from your login to the portal. I believe there was some discussion about adding the feature to allow you to add connections to a request from the progressive capture so your could indicate the a third person, but I am not sure that has got anywhere past the discussion stage. Cheers Martyn
  18. Martyn Houghton
    @James Ainsworth Just to confirm this was resolved and works now. Cheers Martyn
  19. Martyn Houghton
    @James Ainsworth Just wondering if this has moved forward any or is still in the backlog? Cheers Martyn
  20. Martyn Houghton
    @Ehsan Just to advise there seems to be an issue with branching on the existing Organisation ID as well, which we have logged as IN00148181 and @Victor is looking into at the moment. Cheers Martyn
  21. Martyn Houghton
    @James Ainsworth Thanks for the update. Having greater capacity in the action component will be a great addition as well. Cheers Martyn
  22. Martyn Houghton
    @ArmandoDM Just wondering if there was any update on the additional snippet variables? Cheers Martyn
  23. Martyn Houghton
    @James Ainsworth Just wondering if there is any further information on the plans for configurable/linking priorities to the Corporate Service Levels. For example I have the a number of services where each service is linked to five different SLM, which has different number and names of priorities for each. At the moment I am attempting to to deal with this in the progressive capture branch based on organisation id, in order to present a filtered list of priorities in a custom form, but it would be so much easier to manage if the system held a relationship between SLM and priorities so the generic priorities form can be used in the progressive capture. In our case the organisation would determine which SLM applies and therefore the priorities which are available to the client. Cheers Martyn
  24. Martyn Houghton
    @Bob Dickinson Just wondering if there was any further information on the display of Service Level/Priority on the customer portal? Cheers Martyn
  25. Martyn Houghton
    @James Ainsworth Thanks, I keep an eye out for that in the next release. Cheers Martyn
×
×
  • Create New...