1 of 1 people found this helpful
One way we handled this was to create action rules that generated new tickets and auto assigned them to staff. The only problem was, someone had to go back into the newly created tickets to add in additional information like name, department, etc. There wasn't a way to pull information from one ticket when generating the second ticket. We used the same action rules to send emails to the assigned staff the information they needed to complete their task. They could then go into their ticket and typically they just copy and pasted the info into the body of the new tcket(s). You can even stagger the tickets creation based on completion so if something has to wait (like user account first then a computer can be setup) so things can be accomplished in the proper order.
Thanks for the info. We are cutting over to WHD on 6-1-13 so I'm still in the dev stage. This is one of the few things I'll miss from my current high dollar, bloated solution I have now. The other being some sort of robust after hours paging and escalation so I am looking into Alert Central for that but there are still gaps. We don't have a lot of instances right now that require multiple assignments so I was thinking about the multiple ticket approach and then linking them all to the original ticket.
1 of 1 people found this helpful
You could do an approval process. So a person or group (defined as a CAB) gets an email for example to create a network account, they mark this as complete and it goes to the next step say for example assign special group memberships for network resouce access. This also creates a good autit trail for HR purposes.
We use this to a add and remove users upon hire fire. There is a reqest type that only HR can see and then it spits off bunch of emails, network account, phone, ERP access, web site directory ect.
This is driving me nuts. Multiple assignments on a ticket seems like a no brainer but its missing in WHD. Most companies have a New Employee process. That process includes notifying different departments that have a responsibility for new employees and not all of them will be techs in WHD so there needs to be a process for this. Here are the workarounds and the issues I see with them:
Tasks - Run a task that creates a new ticket for each "assignment"
Issue - I'll have 11 tickets for each new hire. Also while the "child tickets" reference each other they do not reference the primary ticket and the primary ticket doesn't reference the child tickets.
Approval Request - Use the "Approval Request" process to create multiple tasks on a ticket for each area
Issue - Other than the obvious one of it referring to Approval instead to Task or Assignment I can only get the tasks to fire when the previous one is complete. I want them all to go out at the same time. If theres a way to do this I haven't found it.
If anyone has any other ideas I would love to hear them. I created a Feature Request HERE for this.
We built this process for new employees:
HR submits new employee ticket that get auto assigned to our HR Coordinator "Tech"
Coordinator maintains a list of email addresses for everyone that needs to "do something" with the new employee request. The coordinator un-assigns the HR manager as the client and re-assigns the new employee's manager as the client. The coordinator then copy-and-pastes the list of email addresses into the BCC box on the ticket and does a "save and email." This is the notification to the key people that a new employee is coming in. The coordinator then UNchecks the BCC box and re-saves the ticket. This prevents each BCC recipient from receiving future email updates.
Each of the recipients receives their notification and performs whatever task they need. They reply to the ticket and and the coordinator reviews the updates. The coordinator will reach out to anyone that has not updated the ticket.
This way we only need 1 tech license for the new hire process.
I need the process to be more automated so I'm going to treat it as an approval request (SW recommendation). Its only a band aid because ideally we should be able to have multiple assignments on a ticket.
I know this is an old post but it remains to be fixed in version 12+. I have been struggling with this also and would like to add to the fuel to get a fix in place.
In our kludged new employee on boarding process ...
- I created a few custom ticket fields to help HR know where to place the data from their internal spreadsheet. HR then opens the new hire ticket under their specific request type (restricted to IT & HR).
- The system routes to the first tech based upon that request type and blank tech assignment via an action rule.
- Once that tech has finished using the data in the custom fields to get the AD record created, they close the ticket and another action rule routes to the next tech for hardware assignment. I have the help desk connected via LDAP so once the data hits the AD it is known to the system outside of the custom fields.
- Next we ask the local facilities manger for an office and land-line phone assignment. For this I have moved away from the named location / department manager object because the system does not know the location of the new user and cannot route to the appropriate facility. To circumvent this I added another email on the action rule mentioned above. The mail goes to the facilities manager and I use <ticket_id> in the subject to allow that email reply to be appended to the original ticket.
Here is where it gets tough for us. I need the new hire's manager to now be asked if our hardware default is acceptable or if they may require additional hardware on their start date. The 2nd tech now has facilities data, but no data from the new employee's department manager. Since the original ticket was opened by HR and we don't want to break the audit trail, a new ticket needs to be created that has the new employee as the client so the system will know what manager to ask.
I see 2 options: Ticket Task or Approval Process:
- Ticket tasks will not allow you to create a ticket based upon a custom field entry, such as the new hire's name. Also they can only be run on a daily schedule which doesn't give us the turn around time we are looking for.
- Approval process could work as I could ask the department manager for approval to allow for additional hardware and their vote detail could contain the information. However, the system cannot route this correctly because the HR employee is still the client on this ticket. I could have a separate approval process for each department where I name the manager in the process itself and then use logic to determine who gets it like the facilities example above, but with several (not-so-static) departments this is far from ideal.
If I could get the system to open a ticket based upon the information in the custom fields via a task or action rule I could arrive at a system without several tickets per new hire and an unbroken audit trail for HR without involving several manual steps in IT. Anyone else have any new ideas on this topic?
In my opinion this remains a huge hole in the WHD functionality and it doesn't even look like its on the radar to be addressed. The result is it leaves us all trying to cobble something together with multiple points of failure. For us a new employee starts with the new hire's manager. I have created many custom fields that are displayed in the client view that they can fill out. Its tailored specifically to the situation (employee start, exit, change etc) so that way we are only capturing the information we need. Once its received by the tech they will verify all the information and then change a drop down on the ticket which fires an action rule. The action rule creates multiple approval requests for all the different areas that have a task for the new employee. The ticket never leaves the tech and the "assignees" click Yes on the initial email to resolve their assignment. Its an easy way to keep track of who has responded and who still needs to finish their part. They all know the email will say Approval but know its a task.
I've seen many ways of doing this but this is whats working for us right now given the tools we have to work with.