Impact and Urgency Progressive Capture forms

[Martyn Houghton]

I understand the implementation of Impact and Urgency in Service Manager is a existing development story.

At the moment in Support Works we capture Impact and Urgency as part of our request logging process, but we do not use the SLA Matrix to calculate the priority (i.e. we have an empty SLA Matrix).

Is there a rough timescale on the development story for Impact and Urgency, particularly the standard form in the Progressive Capture to capture their values?

Cheers

Martyn

[TrevorKillick]

Hi Martyn

I will get one of the Product Owners to comment.

Kind Regards

Trevor Killick

[TrevorKillick]

Hi Martyn

I have checked and the story was raised under CH00124632, this is currently under technical review once thats complete it will move into Development.

The team cannot give an ETA but technical review is one of the last steps carried out before Development starts so it not far off.

Kind Regards

Trevor Killick

[David G]

Trevor,

Bit late to this party but are they any updates on the implementation of impact, urgency and priority matrices?

Thanks,

David

[James Ainsworth]

Hi David,

There is a change that is soon to start development, however at this stage it is only the addition of a Progressive Capture form for capturing the impact and urgency.  The provision of a matrix for working out the priority will be done separately. We are working on some enhancements to the SLM area of Service Manager first.  Once this is available we can start to look at our options for providing a priority matrix.

Regards,

James 

[Lyonel]

Hi all,

Sorry to jump in but I am also very interested by both features mentioned here: capture properly impact and urgency in a progressive capture; then priority matrix. Any idea when the first leg will be available?

[James Ainsworth]

7 hours ago, Lyonel said:

Any idea when the first leg will be available?

Hi Lyonel, 

Thanks for your post.  The first leg of this is in our development queue and work is likely to start in the next few weeks.  This will simply be the selection of the Impact and Urgency fields within Progressive Capture and then visibility of these within the request.

Regards,

James 

[Lyonel]

Thanks for the feedback. Just out of interest, does it also mean that we could map the fields "h_urgency" and "h_impact" from a custom form (like we can do for "h_summary" and "h_description"?

Because that would make it really good and user friendly for admins and users (on top of the standard forms which would already be a great improvement)!

[chrisnutt]

Hi,

I am also very interested in Impact and Urgency and can see that this is quite an old thread. On the wiki Main Request Table info page it still lists h_impact and h_urgency as not yet implemented. Are there any more detailed updates? I haven't been able to find anything on the wiki or elsewhere here. 

Thanks

Chris

[James Ainsworth]

Hi Chris,

We have recently done some work with providing an impact assessment feature.  We will be looking to extend this out to include assessments that work with a Priority Matrix which is based on Impact and Urgency. 

No time frames yet.  I will update this post once we have some movement.

Regards,

James

 

[dwalby]

Not sure if it helps but whilst awaiting the impact assessment progressive capture forms, I've been experimenting with setting up my BPM to 'Wait for Impact Assessment' of which has Urgency and Impact questions (from low to high) - dependent on the answers it calculates the impact which is then used to automatically update the SLA accordingly, e.g. Impact of high and Urgency of high = Priority 1

Seems a very complicated way of doing it, but it works.

[Martyn Houghton]

@James Ainsworth

Is there any update on the Impact and Urgency progressive capture form to allow you to capture the of both parameters? If they can be then presented as variables in the Service Level Management rules, sites can then determine the logic that needs to be applied themselves.

Just to clarify that we are looking at both these parameters, being completed by the end user as part of logging the request, rather than an analyst as per the impact assessment. Though it could be linked to this as well.

Cheers

Martyn

[James Ainsworth]

Hi Martyn,

We still have a change in the backlog for adding a default Progressive Capture form for capturing the impact and urgency.  We are also looking at another option that would allow you to create a custom progressive capture form for Impact and Urgency where you can map your results to the existing impact and urgency fields.  It might be the case that the custom field mapping comes first.  I'll let you as the progresses.

Regards,

James

[Joanne]

Do we have any update on this. I can see the impact assessment feature can be done one the impact is raised but looking to do this more at the PCF level

Many Thanks

 

Jo

[James Ainsworth]

Hi @Joanne

Since the original post we have introduced the Custom Progressive Capture form.  In theory, you could just create your own form with drop down pick lists showing your impact and urgency options and then drive the request using the BPM based on the progressive capture selections.

We may still look to provide out of the box Progressive Capture forms for selecting urgency and impact, but hopefully for now the custom forms will provide what you need.

Let us know if this helps.

Regards,

James

[Joanne]

Is there any particular field i need to update with the results of my impact / risk for it to show the impact in the right hand side of the change ticket

Cheers

 

Jo

[chrisnutt]

On 1/29/2019 at 7:53 PM, James Ainsworth said:

Hi @Joanne

Since the original post we have introduced the Custom Progressive Capture form.  In theory, you could just create your own form with drop down pick lists showing your impact and urgency options and then drive the request using the BPM based on the progressive capture selections.

We may still look to provide out of the box Progressive Capture forms for selecting urgency and impact, but hopefully for now the custom forms will provide what you need.

Let us know if this helps.

Regards,

James

Hi @James Ainsworth,

I'm looking again at impact and urgency. Can you point me in the correct direction for these "Custom Progressive Capture" forms you've introduced as I'm not sure how these differ from the already existing customisation I use so would like to read up?

I'd also like to express my surprise that the tool doesn't natively handle impact and urgency yet. This, I feel, would be seen as a critical feature of a tool such as this. Please can you justify why it can't and why it seems to have slipped off your to-do list?

Thanks

Chris

[James Ainsworth]

Hi @chrisnutt

I first want to assure you that this is still on our to-do list.  While there hasn't been much visual progression in this particular area, there has been some back-end preparation to do with Impact, Urgency, Priority, Priority Matrix and the tie into Service Levels.  Over time this will be made available.  The prioritisation of the many features and requests that have been asked for can be a challenge.  Which ever feature we put forward for the next update,  means someone else's request hasn't made it.  

Regarding Impact and Urgency in progressive capture, at the moment using a custom progressive capture form you can add Impact and Urgency fields, possibly using pick lists driven off of your own defined simple lists.  Within progressive capture, using the conditions on the custom fields, you can drive the direction of the progressive capture based on the selection of your Impact and Urgency fields in order to ask more questions and assess the selected options.  These are stored in the Questions section of a request and optionally you can store them in custom fields and have these displayed within the details of the request.  These custom fields can be made visible on Request List Views.  Within the BPM, after the request has been raised, either the response to the questions or the values in the custom fields can be used to drive the BPM even to a point where the decision nodes can allow you to build a matrix-like environment where these Impact and Urgency values are used to update the priority.  This approach does provide a lot of flexibility, but with flexibility there is usually an overhead with configuration.  When we introduce out of the box Impact and Urgency assessment forms to progressive capture, these may work well for some and will provide a simple and quick approach with little configuration, but this may not have the flexibility that others want and they may take the approach mentioned above.

In my own discussions with users I have also found that many prefer the Progressive Capture to be as short and quick as possible, and have the request raised and start working from the request form and using the power of the BPM.  Having an assessment stage at the starting point of a new request has also been popular.  This is where the support person has the focus on investigating things like the impact and not making a snap and possibly incorrect decision during progressive capture.  If you have seen the Impact Assessment feature that can be driven using the BPM you may get an idea of where we are going with this. 

As there is a solution for collecting impact and urgency information this can influence the progression of the planned change when it comes up against another feature that doesn't have any option available.  I'm not sure if this provides the justification that you are looking for, but I do hope you understand a bit more about our approach and again to be aware that this change is still in our backlog and not forgotten about.

Regards,

James

[Adrian Simpkins]

+1 - the current solution is great using the decision tree to route the outcome, but if there was a node similar perhaps to the impact assessment node in the BPM, would make configuration easier and quicker.

Thanks as always

[HHH]

Is progressive capture assessment forms still something we can expect in the future?