Steve Giller

For me, as everything, I can see the argument for having this as an option, but I would agree it would need to be on a per-team setting, not global, for the reasons you describe. Personally I would not want to publish individual contact details, otherwise you might as well dispense with the Service Desk altogether and go back to customers having "pet" technicians (an exaggeration, perhaps, but still rife in our organisation) but I have no doubt that there are different structures where this would be essential. On the other hand, once we complete our Skype migration we won't have numbers, just names, so the point will be moot.

While I'm being pedantic - Request Resovled?

If it does that it's not longer a 'Wait for Request Closure' node! What seems to be needed is a 'Wait for Request State Change' (or similar) node that can then branch on what the state has changed to.

I will be, but not yet.

Shame - I partly asked as I'm not migrated yet, so it was both something to try just in case, and something to be aware of when we do upgrade.

Does this use SQL structure? If so, what happens if you use != '%' as the test?

By the way, in the screenshot above the "Due On" and "Created On" dates are formatted differently - that will annoy me greatly when we migrate ...

You probably want to join in with this discussion!

I'm not on Service Manager yet, so apologies if this is a basic question. Would the format be that you created a job of "Server Backup" and then set a recurring task within that job to perform that backup? Then once the task is complete you set a new date and the job "sleeps" until the next occurrence is due? For me, that would work - the question would then be how easy you make the assignment of the next due date. I would want to be able to set a schedule at the job level, so when you are asked to add the new date it appears pre-populated with the option to adjust if necessary - and we're back to the awkwardness of what people want as schedules. I'd be happy at that point with a good selection of schedules - I would expect daily, weekly, monthly, nth of the month, nth Monday of the month and every n hours/days/weeks/months to be available and if you want a more complex one just pick the nearest and alter it when you schedule the next task - I'm not sure everyone would agree with me, though.

I think it is generally "simply" the ability to automate the follow-up - the reason for the quotes is that it's not simple to predict the frequency of the schedule. The nth day of the month is easy, sometimes developers remember to allow the nth Monday/Tuedsay etc.. Then someone will need every 3rd Wednesday, or every 10 days, or every leap year if the 29th falls on a weekend - allowing for virtually every combination of schedules is the tricky part.

If you're desperate to schedule you could always use windows scheduler as the trigger and call the Hornbill API to log the call until scheduling is built in.

Make the biggest culprit each week be the one to go through the list

I'm pretty sure that having breached/about to breach calls on a board is one of the stock examples - we've not migrated yet so I'm only going on what I've seen in demos/the forums but I'm certain this has been shown to demonstrate the use of boards.

Can you not also report on closed calls with no closure category and identify the culprits? This is as much, if not more, a discipline issue as it is a procedural issue.

Searching categories would be good; "Network" could return: Desktop->Wireless->No Network Connection Desktop->Wired->No Network Connection Laptop->Wireless->No Network Connection Laptop->Wired->No Network Connection for example - which would both make the selection easier and help to educate end users at the same time. I can't help feeling there's a better way, though!

That's the kind of thing I was thinking of, I think this might work well as an option for tags. The only thing missing is specifying a number of levels, which wouldn't be practical with tags, and in my organisation at least, would probably lead to either everything being dumped under a pretty generic tag, or a secondary tag being picked almost at random from the available selection. This is a procedural issue, however, not a systemic one, and can be managed. It's just a pity that you can't lock offenders in a gibbet for a week as a training measure ... Could a tagging system be designed so that inappropriate secondary tags were disabled? e.g. Having selected "Desktop" the tag "Battery" is no longer available. Or is that just going back to categories again?

I think that's the exact reason that reason categories are surviving, Adam - I've seen all sorts of other methods discussed, but all the benefits that apply elsewhere; fluidity, simplicity, personalisation etc. become problems when it comes to reporting, which is fundamentally structured. I've wondered if tags might work, but if you're not selecting them from a list even simple differences like "Laptop" and "Lap top" can become an issue.

Is it simply a mixup between the letter O and the number 0? I assume SR stands for Service Request - looks like you've followed it with the letter O above, the number makes more sense from an ID perspective.

You'll get on well with most of us on the forums, then

Shouldn't need it, but try ^([0-9]{11})$

It was something I noticed that Creole uses, I was more asking out of interest for when we migrate rather than expecting to have it added. It might be useful for some people to achieve unformatted text without using the code tags, of course, unless there's already an alternative.

Does the Hornbill wiki support {{{ ... }}} as unformatted text?

I'm sorry I can't help with this (not being on the SM platform yet) but can I just jump in to say that the phrase "check the amount of OOH on a monthly basis" has brightened my morning!

I think it's this bit (top right) and then: Hornbill Support Forums → Your control panel → Settings → Notification Options

Is Office an AD attribute? I know we use physicalDeliveryOfficeName but I'm no AD guru!