Comments

  • Baxter

    Thanks Barry, that works great.

    I hadn't even noticed that it was possible to expand those sections of the ribbon !

  • Baxter

    Liked - That would save a lot of time!

  • Baxter

    To check a particular reply has been received- you could use a report which joins incident table to thread table to message_trans table.

    message_trans.trans_type contains details of date and time of Email Sent and Email View.

    I have found this has limited success though - I occasionally find a reply which I am fairly sure has been viewed which does not reflect on the report!

     

  • Baxter

    We've had this requirement also, and ask the managers to make their own customizations to one standard report. This might not be an option in this situation, but this is one way to approach it:

    1. Give the managers permission to customize reports, and then give them all the same report which has a group filter on it, already ticked to show all (or no) groups by default.

    2. Give them instructions to pick the groups they are interested in from the filter the first time they use the report. Then can then click  “save as default” so they do not have to customize the report again next time they run it - https://cx.rightnow.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/2175

    Their change to the defaults will persist until a reinstall/service pack/upgrade - when they will need to customize again.

     

  • Baxter

    Hi Jep,

    You can add other Answer fields as filters, also change the default ticked values. Find the report being used for the Search Knowledgebase "Search Report” in the workspace editor. Create a copy of that, edit the filters on the report as you wish, then adjust the workspace so it uses your new version.

    Thanks

    Baxter

  • Baxter

    I might be misunderstanding, but is this is because the rule you've shared in rulelog2.jpg needs to be end with a "Transition State and Stop" rather than a "Transition State and Continue"?

  • Baxter

    Would agree that that some form of read receipt would be highly useful, and would like it - and tracked links generally - to work for all contacts on the incident reply, not just the primary.

     

  • Baxter

    We've just gone from May 2016 to 18A. Our experience was generally very good - the upgrade was completed quickly and with very little impact to users and customers. The new version seems to have fixed the memory errors and crashes that our Windows 10 using agents were experiencing several times a day, which was a bonus for us.

    If I can offer advice I would say give close attention when testing the new answer editor as indicated by the link above. Our content writers have had to adapt to some changes to how answers can be written.

    We found that answers could not be created or edited for 24 hours after cut over, due to some post-upgrade updates which had to be made to the Answers table. If you are heavy users of answer functionality I would certainly talk with your upgrade manager about this as well.

  • Baxter

    Hi Mike - I think you are specifically referring to incidents you've logged with Oracle support, and would like them to adopt this so it's very clear who's responsible for the wait?

    If so, I agree. We're only shown Status Type on the service request history (https://cx.rightnow.com/app/account/questions/list) so perhaps there is already a status like this in use, it just isn't exposed to us currently.

  • Baxter

    Seconded. I can't tell our testers with any certainly when a test site will be available which makes it very difficult to book their time in advance.

  • Baxter

    Hi there, check out this thread http://communities.rightnow.com/posts/5175ba4928 as may help.

    Thanks

    Baxter

  • Baxter

    Agree that ans_hits table is not specific enough to truly provide insight in to the performance of customer portal. Just being able to filter by Interface is not enough, we need to do this by product and category also in order to benefit.

  • Baxter
    Sebastiaan said:

    Hi Baxter.

    I don't see any solution for this as the content in the conditional section is generated before sending. It does not send serperate messages to primary and CC, both receive the same content. It might be possible to set a condition based on if there is a CC but it wont show any different content to the CC.

    View original

    Thanks Sebastiaan for taking the time to look into this. I will take this to the ideas lab!

  • Baxter

    I’m mainly a lurker but I do answer occasionally. My thought is that if posters (myself included) posed their questions a little differently they’d gain more responses. For example I see a lot of comments asking for help on a very specific piece of configuration to meet very specific business requirements. However well written the post is, it is impossible for an outsider to fully understand those things, sometimes even after clarification, so I often feel under qualified to comment.

     

    If your question is - just for example - “I wrote my own report on turnaround time and it doesn’t work, please help!” perhaps more responses would be forthcoming if the question was phrased as “How do you folks monitor average turnaround time?” or “What’s a good report to use, and any drawbacks I should consider?”

  • Baxter

    Hi Steve,

    Answering the question you addressed to Marc - within our company, GDPR requirement “The controller should be able to identify all those recipients to whom personal data has been disclosed” is being interpreted as meaning we need an audit log of any time a standard or custom object field which contains personal data is viewed or edited. This could be by console users during the course of handling an incident, when they run a report (we are particularly interested if they exported that information) and also I guess customers logged into customer portal viewing a report of their incident history.

    Kincaid's suggestion above about allowing admins to choose which fields to track at greater granularity in an enhanced audit log would seem to be a possible solution to that.

    However, I’m aware that requiring record views to be included in this desired enhanced audit log - in addition to edits -  is stretching the scope of the original user story for this idea. I don’t want to derail this thread if this is not a requirement from others, so would be happy to give more details if needed and continue offline, you could get in touch with me via our client success manager Ajay Joshi who is already aware of our need for this.