Routing Rule - Auto update email troubles

[Josh Bridgens]

Morning All,

 

We have a strange setup for one certain type of call while we are mid transition of a phone contract, unfortunately we are having to use the third parties call references for any outbound and inbound email.

Obviously this is not what we wanted however they have stressed they are not prepared to work with us without this.

I thought I could get round this by having our reference number for customer updated in the body of the email, but in white text so its not actually readable unless people go looking... this isnt working.

The routing rule I have setup is as follows:

The Template We are sending out is very barebones as we have had to strip off all branding for now for these calls, however I have highlighted where our reference shows in white:

 

Is there any reason this may not be working?

 

Josh

 

[Dan Munns]

@Josh Bridgens looks like you are missing a . in the summary regex (beginning) which will make the wildcard invalid.

[Josh Bridgens]

Just fixed this @Dan Munns

 

Unfortunately its still not updating the call

Any Other ideas?

 

[Josh Bridgens]

I thought our original call update rule would have worked anyway:

 

However even that one doesn't work....

Manually going into the emails to update these calls is another job we definitely don't need

[Steve Giller]

Hi @Josh Bridgens 

The reason it's not updating is that the process works in two steps.

Firstly, the Rule checks for a match to see if the email needs processing; this can, using the correct variables, "see" the subject and the body amongst other things. This part may be failing because in your original post you are looking in "summary" rather than "subject"

Secondly the Operation checks to see if there is a Hornbill Reference in the subject line - this is where your rule will always fail because your Hornbill Reference is in the body, and the Operation is not looking there.

[Josh Bridgens]

Hi @Steve Giller

 

2 minutes ago, Steve Giller said:

Firstly, the Rule checks for a match to see if the email needs processing; this can, using the correct variables, "see" the subject and the body amongst other things. This part may be failing because in your original post you are looking in "summary" rather than "subject"

I realised that afterwards and changed it after re-looking at the original request updater we have, apologies.

 

3 minutes ago, Steve Giller said:

Secondly the Operation checks to see if there is a Hornbill Reference in the subject line - this is where your rule will always fail because your Hornbill Reference is in the body, and the Operation is not looking there.

Is there any way to fix this?

 

I'm at a loss here.

 

Josh

[Dan Munns]

@Josh Bridgens in the email template you are using you just need to add the h_pk_reference variable into the subject line field somewhere. 

In all of our customer facing email templates the reference is injected into the subject line.

Our (less then impressive) new request logged email template:

Or you could have it look in the body of the email. Unless there is a specific reason it needs to be in both? 

Edit: The second field in the screen shot is the subject line field. Trimmed out the title without realising until I posted it.

[Steve Giller]

1 minute ago, Dan Munns said:

Or you could have it look in the body of the email. Unless there is a specific reason it needs to be in both? 

Just to reiterate - you cannot match against a Hornbill reference in the body of the email during the Operation. The Rule can do this but if the Hornbill Reference is not in the subject you will not be able to match it to a request, so no updates can be performed.

Adding the Hornbill Reference to the subject line along with the External reference would be my preferred option.

[Josh Bridgens]

@Dan Munns

 

Any outgoing from us with these calls are being forwarded to a remedy instance and to an externally internal, not quite employee user/customer  (Genuine description I had)

 

And they want to use the Remedy references, much to my dismay and fighting it they agreed they would.

 

To avoid confusion for the users we have agreed to just have one reference and We would do the struggling of finding the calls etc. Thats why its in white in the body, as I thought it would pick it up.

[Victor]

@Josh Bridgens why not having a summary like:

Some summary here - Remedy Ref: NNNN - Hornbill Ref: ZZZZ and you can even shorten it like Some summary here - RMD: NNNN - HRB: ZZZZ or this [REM: NNNN] Some summary here [HRB: ZZZZ]

[Josh Bridgens]

I think I'm going to have to P*** some people off and put it in the Subject...

 

Many Thanks for the responses guys, Much appreciated

[Victor]

@Josh Bridgens - I'll take it the obfuscated word is Persuade?   

[Josh Bridgens]

@Victor most definitely, That's what I find myself doing more often than not lately, Persuading people off