Asset Custom Fields

[Steve Giller]

Are there any custom fields available when creating a new Asset Type?

I spotted this from build 1013: As an Asset Administrator I would like additional asset attributes added against the existing Asset Classes {CH00142844} but I'm assuming that added some static fields rather than custom fields.

We have some laptop trolleys holding multiple devices that we want to store as assets, but I'm being asked for information such as "Is the trolley bookable?" which don't appear to be available.

[Steven Boardman]

Hi @DeadMeatGF

The approach we have with assets is that we ask customers to let us know if there are additional asset attributes and we look to collate these and add new one's in quarterly. 

This way we can (overtime) build up definitive asset Classes where customers can then choose which attributes to use on their asset types against asset classes.

So if you can let us know what attributes and which classes you are looking for we can look to get these considered for the next round of attributes to be updated. 

The same is true if we need to consider additional asset classes.

Obviously any additional asset attributes won't pollute customers existing asset types as the new asset attributes  will be off by default and the asset manager users would have to choose to introduce them against their asset types if they wanted to use them

Hope that makes sense

Steve

[Steve Giller]

Thanks @Steven Boardman

The attributes I've been asked for are:

• Bookable: Yes/No.
• Owner: (This needs to be able to be a department or an individual, or free text)
• Manufacturer:
• Model:
• Capacity: (Number of device bays)
• Static: Yes/No (some trolleys can be moved from room to room, some are in a fixed location)
• Device Type: The device the trolley houses.
• Lock Code: (personally I'm not keen on this, it's potentially a security risk)

[Steven Boardman]

Thanks @DeadMeatGF

Some of these attributes are already available:

* Manufacturer 

* Model 

These already exist under both the Computer System and Computer Peripheral asset classes, so you could use either class for now if you wanted to get started.

I'll suggesy the likes of:

* Bookable

* Static

* Type

* Capacity 

Are added to the general asset attributes as they could be applicable across all asset classes.

We already have a field for Owner, but granted this is a user only picker.  We do have a story with a lot of community support for the Used By option to be extended to include groups as well as users, so i have added you as interested to this and hopefully this one will not be too far away.  

Re, Lock Code if you are not sold on this one perhaps we'll leave it for now and maybe suggest additional information can be held in the Notes field?  

I'll update this once the next round of asset attributes are added

Steve

[Steve Giller]

Thanks @Steven Boardman

I'll pass that on, and recommend that the Lock Code is left for a more secure location, like a password safe!
I wasn't sure of the best class to use as a base, but Computer Peripheral is probably the best, even though it feels wrong as the computers attach to the trolley rather than the other way around - I'm sure I'll get over it, though.

 

[HHH]

Please let the Used By to also include external Customers and Organizations, this is very vital to our company since we are B2B only and knowing which customer is hosted on which server w.o external tools would be a great improvement.

 

[Steve Giller]

@Steven Boardman Sorry if there's already a guide to this that I've missed - but is there an easy(ish) way change the asset type of an existing asset?
The Trolleys mentioned above are already in the system as the General asset type, and we (obviously) want to change them to Peripheral/Trolley asset types, but Type is not an editable field under Asset Management.

[Steven Boardman]

@HHH the story we have in the list mentioned above will cater for the Used By does include assignment to internal groups as well as external organisations and contacts. 

We have a colleague from your organisation already on as an interested connection to this story, and as it progresses we will post back on to the related forum posts (including this one) so hopefully this will help out in your situation when available

@DeadMeatGF i've had a look and no UI way to change the the asset type of an asset once created  

[Steve Giller]

@Steven Boardman Never mind, there are ... other ways ... 

 

[Steve Giller]

@Steven Boardman Actually, I'm not sure there are (practically) ... other ways ... without deleting the assets and recreating them.
Do you have any suggestions of whether that can be achieved without losing the request history? Preferably without going in and manually linking the assets to the historical calls after the change!

 

[Steven Boardman]

@DeadMeatGF I have asked the question of the developers to see if there is any alternative options for this this, once i have a response i'll post back either way.

[James Ainsworth]

On 3/13/2018 at 7:25 AM, HHH said:

Please let the Used By to also include external Customers and Organizations, this is very vital to our company since we are B2B only and knowing which customer is hosted on which server w.o external tools would be a great improvement.

Hi @HHH

This feature is now available.  On the Used By field there is now a toggle to turn on Sharing which will expose a new control for adding and removing multiple users, including contacts and organizations.

Regards,

James

[James Ainsworth]

On 3/12/2018 at 8:19 AM, DeadMeatGF said:

Bookable: Yes/No.

@DeadMeatGF

I was revisiting this requirement and wanted to ask about the Bookable field.  If we consider that the enabling this field on an asset type indicates that it is a bookable asset, would the options be better as Available, Booked Out, Not Available and maybe something like Out of Service if it is broken. Or do you have a specific need for a Yes/No option?

Regards,

James

 

[Steve Giller]

@James Ainsworth The Available, Booked Out, Not Available etc. would be useful. If it was a Yes/No we'd probably have put those options into a Simple List anyway.