Custom Expression AND / OR

[Dan Munns]

Hi all,

I am making BPMs for our new change processes and want to have decisions based on our risk/impact table.

Would the AND/OR statements be best like this:

IF 1 AND A OR B AND X OR Y OR Z

or will I have to do them like this:

IF 1 AND A AND X OR 1 AND A AND Y OR 1 AND A AND Z?

Risk Table attached

Basically I want to base the decisions on the type of change selected (1-3) the level of Impact (A-D) and the level of Risk (W-Z)

Or is there a better way to do it completely?

Thanks

Dan

 

Edit: Change types are Emergency, Normal and Standard

[Dan Munns]

Little help anybody?

@Victor maybe?

[Steve Giller]

It's a bit tricky to understand what you're after, Dan.
e.g. IF 1 AND A OR B AND X OR Y OR Z : 1 will always evaluate to True, so clearly '1' represents something, but without knowing what it's all guesswork.
Similarly, without knowing what A/B and X/Y/Z represent and how they link together it's very difficult to build a mental picture.

[Dan Munns]

@DeadMeatGF

Ok so in my BPM I have 3 decision nodes to decide if the change type is Major, Significant or Minor.

In the PC form they have to select the change level of Emergency, Normal or Standard (1, 2 or 3)

The Major, Significant or Minor only applies to Normal changes so I was going to start the string with "IF 2 AND" as if they have selected 1 or 3 it will follow a different path.

To work out if the change is Major, Significant or Minor we use the risk table above.

So say a user selects Normal (2) for change level, Very High for Risk (A, with High, Medium and Low being B, C and D) and Business Wide for Impact (W, with Significant, Partial and Individual being X, Y and Z) I need the BPM to log it as a Major change.

The issue I am having is that there are a number of different selections with the same outcome and rather than have a decision node for each one (which slows the BPM down a hell of a lot) I was hoping for 3 decision nodes, one for each outcome.

I hope that makes it a little clearer (although I am not sure it will)

Thanks

Dan

[Steve Giller]

Definitely clearer - maybe not easier, but clearer

[Dan Munns]

Probably harder if anything @DeadMeatGF

Kind of wish our Service Desk go live went horribly. As it stands it has gone really well with loads of other teams now interested in using Service Manager. Hence the addition of Change. Along with HR, Finance, Facilities etc etc. The business is looking at the portal being the one stop shop for all things request related I think.

More work for me I guess. Well, more posts in the forum anyway  

[Steve Giller]

OK, so this is very clumsy and was built by trial and error, but I have created a table built by assigning values to the options which matches the results in the risk table you showed. I'm sure there's a programmatical way to do that, but I'm not sure I could work that out, certainly not in the time available!

You can get the values in the left table by assigning the numeric values to the selections and adding them together as shown in the right table, and the (EXCEL) formula to translate them is =IF(J4<20,"Minor",IF(J4<30,"Significant","Major"))

Hopefully that will be of some help, if only as a concept.

[Dan Munns]

Thanks @DeadMeatGF

How to I add that into our custom expression for the decision nodes?

Sorry if that is a stupid question but its Friday and been a long week and its Friday  

Thanks

Dan

[Steve Giller]

I think you can set the values to be numeric and the display to be text in the ProCap question, so the customer would select "Business Wide" and the BPM would receive 19, and they'd select "Low" (like any customer ever selects low!!!) and the BPM would receive 1, add them together into a custom field and test that value in a decision node.

Like you say - long week, Friday, this is partly conjecture!

[Dan Munns]

Ok thanks @DeadMeatGF

I get where you are going. I will probably give it a try on Monday, when I am fresh and ready and raring to go after a nice relaxing weekend.

Oh wait, kids, dog, wife.......nevermind.  

[Victor]

@Dan Munns

3 hours ago, Dan Munns said:

Oh wait, kids, dog, wife.......

Sounds dangerously close to having a life ?!

Have you tried the new Assessments functionality?

[m.vandun]

@Victor yay, that sounds a lot like a priority matrix. Did not know this was available.

[Dan Munns]

@Victor at the moment my life seems to revolve around Hornbill and our new change process.

Is there a video explaining the assessments bit? The wiki seems a little thin tbh

Thanks

Dan

[Dan Munns]

@Victor I have had a little look into this but I need the decision process to be automatic rather than involve any human input.

[m.vandun]

@Victor

Had a fiddle with this as well and for me it is ok to select answers and based upon these questions a priority is set. However it would be useful when these questions could be asked in the progressive capture. So when a request is created the correct priority is set.

[Steven Boardman]

On 7/28/2017 at 9:08 AM, Dan Munns said:

Probably harder if anything @DeadMeatGF

Kind of wish our Service Desk go live went horribly. As it stands it has gone really well with loads of other teams now interested in using Service Manager. Hence the addition of Change. Along with HR, Finance, Facilities etc etc. The business is looking at the portal being the one stop shop for all things request related I think.

More work for me I guess. Well, more posts in the forum anyway  

@Dan Munns just looking through the thread of this post and as we stand at the moment there isn't a risk impact matrix available, but maybe an assessment of progressive capture answers can arrive at the same result and using the custom expression builder to either use the numerical values for PC answers is an option to go with.   Another feature to consider here is the ability to daisy chain decision nodes together to give you the ability to evaluate PC answers in that fashion.    Something like

Change Type = Emergency then branch to another decision node with a second evaluation such as Risk = Low,Medium, High, Very High - each branching to final custom expressions for Impact = Business Wide, Significant, Partial, Individual with each outcome then setting the required value / decision

This would need to be created again for each Change Type, so would be the same for Change Type = Normal and Change Type = Standard

This would be a fair amount of nodes in the designer so adding them into a group and then collapsing it would clear up the layout once defined. 

Another consideration with the introduction of the Change Catalog capability, would be to create different catalog items for the different change types, this would then reduce your need to evaluate the type in the business process and would leave just Risk and Impact to evaluate?

Impact Assessment 

The impact assessment option is post Progressive Capture, but in your business process you can use the option to invoke the assessment option and your custom questions, and then follow this with a suspend await impact assessment, to wait for the questions to be answered.  Once they are answered the impact assessment matrix would automatically calculate and set the impact value based on the answers to custom questions like:

Risk = Very High

Impact = Business Wide

You could then follow the suspend awaiting impact assessment node with a decision node, and branch on the outcome (Impact value) calculated from your custom questions and the answers provided. 

I appreciate the impact assessment is post logging, and you may well be looking to automate this by setting values based on answers during the logging process.

On a separate note, i see your comment about other parts of the organisation being interested in Service Manager and possibly providing a single Service Catalog for your employees, with different teams defining and offering up their services through the Hornbill Portal.  If this was an area of interest, we have an Enterprise Service Management webinar tomorrow morning at 10:30 which might be valuable to you, or colleagues in these different departments in terms of an insight to what is possible when teams co-exist and support the same common customer (your employees). Anyway this is a free to join webinar, and if you are interested you can register here:

https://register.gotowebinar.com/register/8928104070581733890

Steve

 

 

[Dan Munns]

Hi @Steven Boardman

The only change types which would need the matrix style decision is Normal change. Emergency, if selected goes down a different route and missed out a sizable chunk of the BPM. Standard changes do the same as authorisation isn't required.

Within Normal change we have Major, Significant and Minor and I just need a way of automatically deciding, based on the combination of selections in the PC what the subtype is. Major, Significant and Minor changes all have different CAB requirements and as the only (hopefully temporarily) change manager I don't want to have to manually sift through all the changes to decide who needs to see what.

I was hoping that the custom expressions could be used so what multiple options as described above could be done in one expression without breaking something or seeing everything as either false or true no matter what. Multiple decision nodes one after the other tend to slow down the whole process (as demonstrated by our new starter and password rest BPMs) so I wanted to stay away from that if possible.

If it isn't possible to create custom expressions with multiple AND/OR statements then I will have to look at daisy chaining decision nodes.

Thanks

Dan