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
    @Ehsan Thanks for the quick response. That will help with the implementation of new services and customers on instance. Cheers Martyn
  2. Martyn Houghton
    At the moment in order branch in a progressive capture based on the Organisation in question, you have to include the organisation details node as well as the customer search one. Also it is only the Organisation ID that is presented to the branch node. Would really useful to have the Organisation Name provisioned to the branch node and not need to include the organisation details node in the progressive capture on the basis that the organisation can be inferred from the customer contact. Cheers Martyn
  3. Martyn Houghton
    @James Ainsworth Thanks, it might give me some hope Cheers Martyn
  4. Martyn Houghton
    @James Ainsworth As I am currently doing a large volume of editing and setting up of new services at the moment, having the facility to search/filter the services, especially by service category would be really helpful. Is there any further update on the planned changes to the services screen? Cheers Martyn
  5. Martyn Houghton
    @gregmarcroftorc We use the process of creating an monthly inbox archive folder where processed email are automatically moved to when they are action-ed, so it is easier to search for emails. The other point to be aware of if you delete the email after you have updated the request from it, you will no longer be able to use the 'View Email' option on the timeline entry to view the source email, so you will just have the textual content of the email inserted into the the request timeline. Cheers Martyn
  6. Martyn Houghton
    @Gerry As far as my understanding as well, once you have the request at a resolved status there are two buttons to confirm whether it is fixes or is still broken, the latter which then re-opens the incident and the former closes it. Cheers Martyn
  7. Martyn Houghton
    @James Ainsworth If there was a Save/Draft button on the resolution action tab, which then saved the values and created a timeline update, that would achieve both, whilst not requiring the manual copy and paste back into the Resolution action tab. We could then use the BPM to check if the resolution text/category is not blank and automatically resolve the request without manual intervention when the customer responds. This would also lend itself to having the option on the portals for the customer to have a button to confirm resolution and trigger the process themselves. Cheers Martyn
  8. Martyn Houghton
    @Gerry, @AbdiH In terms of a scenario, this would be where a request has been updated by the customer to say the issues has been resolved with the request sitting at a Open status. Then there being a delay before the owner of the request actions this update setting the request to resolved. The resolution date and time would be the time the analyst updates the request to resolved not the date and time of when the customer confirmed resolution. By being able to back date the resolution up to the time of the last update, like it was possible in Support Works and the resolution date/time and within SLA indicators being updated based on the back dated operation. In terms of achieving the same outcome, having the ability to override the SLA outcomes and resolution date/time in an audited manner would be fine. Cheers Martyn
  9. Martyn Houghton
    Just wondering if there any plans to improve the usability of time picker, as this is daily annoyance which could easily be alleviated. Cheers Martyn
  10. Martyn Houghton
    It would be really useful to allow our 2nd Tier Analyst to prefill and save the resolution description and category on the request, but only save it, not actually complete the resolution step. This way they can enter this information when they believe the issue has been resolved whilst awaiting the customer to confirm resolution. Then on the customer response our 1st Tier Team or colleague in the supporting team can complete the resolution step on the customers confirmation without it having to be done by the request owner. This appear to be technically possible as in affect these fields are populated when a request is 're-opened' with the original resolution information, so it just seems to be there needs to be an open to save them in the user app without completing the resolution step. Cheers Martyn
  11. Martyn Houghton
    Apologies if this has already been posted, but it would be really useful in Service Manager to have the ability to back date resolution updates, similar to the Support Works back dating capability, where the date/time updated is recorded but the date/time used in the SLA calculation is set to an earlier point in time up to or after the last timeline update. Cheers Martyn
  12. Martyn Houghton
    We have now rolled out the use of Sub Statuses on our services, but now have the transition period where we have global sub statuses applying to all requests, but a mixture of workflows, i.e. request logged prior to rolling this out still have workflow which are not sub status aware so only set the primary parent status values. This causes a problem as we have request being put On-Hold via the BPM, but have a sub-status of Pending, which is a sub status of Open not On-Hold. In order to then be able to 'resume' the request via the user app, we have change the sub status another sub-status value and then back to our standard Open Sub-Status of 'Pending'. Also the incorrect sub-status value causes confusion when being displayed in the Request List and in the Customer Portal. It would help with the transition if the BPM Status Update node had the ability to set a default 'On-Hold' and 'Open' sub-status when one is not specified in the BPM node. Cheers Martyn
  13. Martyn Houghton
    @TrevorKillick Just wondering if there was any further thoughts/plans to have a password duration expiry option on customer portal accounts, as without this there is no way to enforce/trigger the other password polices on existing accounts, which we have some several thousands off. Cheers Martyn
  14. Martyn Houghton
    This also appears to be the case when resolving as well. It is possible to set the case as Resolved which does no support sub statuses and the sub status from it's previous state is retained. When a parent status is changed to one which does not have sub-statuses (New & Resolved), the sub status value needs to be cleared. Cheers Martyn
  15. Martyn Houghton
    Our workflow at the moment sets the primary status to 'New' when it is first get assigned to our 1st Tier Team and again when it is then assigned on to the 2nd Tier Team. In the latter stage, the workflow is setting the parent status to 'New' as before, but the Sub Status is not being cleared as there is no sub statuses supported under the 'New' status. I have tried updating the BPM to manually set the Sub Status value to blank, but the BPM then fails. Therefore there does not appear to be away to clear a sub status when changing the status to 'New'. Cheers Martyn
  16. Martyn Houghton
    @Victor, @Michael Sharp We too could do with the ability to set multiple email recipients in the BPM Email node, as we too have a string of them at the moment to achieve this. Cheers Martyn
  17. Martyn Houghton
    @James Ainsworth Thanks for confirming. For future readers this is under the 'Service Level Management' heading under the role and not the 'Service Desk & Self Service' heading where the general application rights are granted. Cheers Martyn
  18. Martyn Houghton
    As part of our implementation of Sub Statuses we have created a couple of On Hold Statuses which we would only use for specific circumstances having no on-hold time expiry time. We would like to be able to restrict the use of these to certain 'authorised' users, i.e. Team Leaders/Managers, so it would be good to have the ability to restrict the permission to select a sub status value based on role membership. For example we have a Sub Status of 'Support Hold' which we use in the rare circumstance when a customer annual maintenance payment is overdue. This should only ever be used on requests by a Team Leader/Manager and ideally we would not want normal analyst to be able to select this or even better be able to see this status in the options to select. Cheers Martyn
  19. Martyn Houghton
    @Mohamed Thanks for the prompt response. That will be a great help with being able to filter views based on the sub-status. Cheers Martyn
  20. Martyn Houghton
    We are implementing the use of Sub Statuses which are updated both by the BPM and manually. Though not an issues when updating by the BPM, when you manually change the Sub Status through the Live user app, a pop up window appears prompting for a reason every time. This creates more work and becomes annoying very quickly. Though there are certain scenarios where we would want to make the pop up and completion of the reason a required process, there needs to be the ability within the setup of the sub-status to configure if changing the request to said status requires the prompting for a reason pop up or not. In the latter case changing the sub-status should not prompt at all and just update the request. Related to this would also the ability to define against the sub-status the default visibility of the timeline update as well. Cheers Martyn
  21. Martyn Houghton
    Though the Sub Status field is present and view-able on the the Request List screen, it is not appearing in the condition drop down when setting up a view on the Request List. One of the main reasons we are implementing Sub Statuses is to allow our analyst to be able to differentiate and filter their request lists based on the more detailed status information offered by the Sub Status facility. Can this be added to the condition drop down as a matter of urgency? The other recent additions such as Service Level and Service Level Agreement are present, but not the Sub Status field. Cheers Martyn
  22. Martyn Houghton
    @chriscorcoran Chris I notice that the recent collaboration build includes a fix in relation to contact organisation details when making a change, so could be related to your issue. Cheers Martyn
  23. Martyn Houghton
    @David Hall That's great news. Fingers crossed this should hopefully tie in with when we are going to start rolling this out on our services. Cheers Martyn
  24. Martyn Houghton
    @chriscorcoran Does sound like that is the cause. I would log a request with Hornbill to get them to check it our under the skin in the database, as perhaps the Guest Accounts elements is not being updated when you change a contacts parent organisation. Cheers Martyn
  25. Martyn Houghton
    @chriscorcoran Sounds like you are in the correct place. In Guest Accounts in the Admin Tool, are they showing as the original or updated Company/Organisation? It could also be permissions issue. Are all the 6 that are displayed already enabled for Organisation View, i.e. is it just showing you who is currently setup as you do not have permission to change them? For our 1st Tier team we need to add the add the application rights as below. Cheers Martyn
×
×
  • Create New...