Hornbill Users
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Keith last won the day on May 4

Keith had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

13 Good

About Keith

  • Rank
    Senior Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

191 profile views
  1. @James Ainsworth & @David Hall Thanks for your responses. Both changes are very welcome ones. Look forward to the next update.
  2. @James Ainsworth Good to hear that we will be able to set statuses as draft, that will be very useful as introducing these without is troublesome. One more "issue". I have setup an active sub status of "In Process" and an on hold sub status of "Awaiting information". In addition I have assigned the "In Process" sub status to be set upon an update by the customer. The problem is that is a customer adds an update to the ticket when we have not set a sub status, the update causes the "In Process" status to be set. In other words I wouldn't expect the "In Process" sub status to be set if the request didn't already have a sub status. Hope this makes sense. Keith
  3. Hi @James Ainsworth thanks for the update. Good to hear this is being worked on. I look forward to hearing more as development progresses. Thanks Keith
  4. @David Hall I'm seeing mixed results. Updates sent via email appear to have some additional text but this appears in the form of one continuous block of text that represents the entire mail, which makes it difficult to read. Updates by the customer (which i presume are those updated via the portal) have not been changed and contain no additional information. Keith
  5. @James Ainsworth Can you offer any guidance on how best to implement sub statuses? Ultimately I would want to configure a number of sub statuses (some global, some service specific) and alter BPM to apply statuses in certain situations. The problem is that as soon as I setup a sub status it becomes available for use. This doesn't give me any time to configure the system, document the processes and communicate it to my global user community before people start using them (possibly incorrectly). Ideally there would have been some way of activating them after being fully configured. Thanks Keith
  6. @James Ainsworth Great! Thanks for confirming.
  7. Good to hear @James Ainsworth I notice also that the Sub status is not available for use in views/charts. Is this in the pipeline also? Keith
  8. @Steven Boardman @David Hall We find that most of our customer responses are done via email. Will an update via email be one of the triggers to change the status? Keith
  9. @Victor I was just about to raise a new topic which I think is related to this and the new sub status function. The new functionality allows me to set a new status "On customer Response" - however, on testing this the status only appears to change if the user 'updates' the request via the portal. If the customer responds via email the status does not change. Keith
  10. I have been asked if it would be possible to create a report along the lines of the image below. I'm not too upto speed on the possibilities of the report tool itself. Creating this via widgets/scorecards etc would be cumbersom at best. Any suggestions?
  11. @Ehsan and @James Ainsworth Thanks for your explanations. Sounds like this is possibly one for the future for us if/when more functionality is introduced.
  12. OK Thanks for the update @James Ainsworth
  13. Could someone please explain the new linked Services feature in more detail. Its not clear to me what this does. Thanks Keith
  14. Is there any update on this topic? One of our most frustrating complaints is that users "miss" services because they don't notice the More Services button after the first six services. Can't we just have an option to define the default number of services to display. Six is way too limiting. The outcome of this is that we get many issues raised under the wrong service as they can't see the one they should be using.
  15. Thanks Victor. Good to hear.