Enhancement: Allow Request Profile Codes to be set in Service Portfolio at the 'bottom' of the tree and have that work in the Request UI

[Berto2002]

The design feature I would like to challenge with this enhancement request is the one that gives this result in the UI when the Profile code is specified in the Service Portfolio configuration at the 'bottom' of the tree.

I think the design has come about from the idea that the "Request Category Level" was designed to provide a sub-set list of choices to the agent below a given item.

We are now in the days of automation and everyone is looking for ways to cut-out steps here and there. A really obvious one from our experience is to adapt the design specification of this setting to have a second criteria which is to provide the ability to automatically set a Request Profile for a Service to avoid manual input

At the most basic, the enhancement is simply to populate the Request Profile Code with the selected value itself if there are no sub-codes for that value

I think this would be a huge win for automation and enable use to take out a lot of manual clicks.

 

[Steve Giller]

4 minutes ago, Berto2002 said:

provide the ability to automatically set a Request Profile for a Service to avoid manual input

Both Request and Closure categories can be set automatically in the Workflow.

[Berto2002]

Yes Steve, we do use this in circumstances where we have a 1-to-1 relationship between a Service and a Workflow. but this is rare.

Most of our request volumes come through the use of 'generic' workflows used by multiple services; and then we are faced with large decision-making workflow configurations that need maintaining to get all the ifs and buts to allocate the correct code.

I also appreciate that Custom Lookups can help in this area somewhat. This I think we where I would have to go if we will never be able to just 'hard-code' a profile code as requested.

An alternative enhancement would be to request Hornbill instigate a validation warning in the service portfolio configuration to prevent the lowest level being selected in the Request Category Level; but I think to add to the features rather than restrict them is better use of coding time.

[samwoo]

I feel like what could potentially benefit is extending "Catalogs" and be able to set a "default" Request Profile code against Catalog Items. When a ticket is logged using that Catalog, the Request Profile is set automatically. Unless I am reading this incorrectly, this could help? I can certainly see this being of huge benefit. We also have similar issues with generic workflows being used as well.

[Berto2002]

This is exactly what I am suggesting @samwoo; that when the Request Category Level is set at the 'bottom' it is treated like a default code. Nice way to word it.