This is a public Idea Center  publicRSS

Idea

    48 liked this

    [Under Consideration] Audit log does not provide enough...
    Idea posted June 7, 2013 by Ronald HilemanWhiz, last edited July 31, 2015 by Vimal ChopraApprentice, tagged Agent Desktop, Reporting, System Admin and Configuration 
    754 Views, 25 Comments
    Title:
    [Under Consideration] Audit log does not provide enough Details
    User Story / Description:

    We would like to be able to see what field(s) were edited and possibly the before and after values of these fields when an incident is edited.  Currently, we only have the message, "Edit"   and "Edited from : Incident Editor".

    The transactions table only has queue and status information in the attributes.

     

    We would like to know what field(s) were actually edited/modified.

    Thanks.

    Comment

    • tlar

       I agree, it would be nice to have enhanced audit log capabilities.

      Here is the specific requirement we have:

      Need the capability to identify when a disposition was changed and by whom, as well as if the category of an incident was changed and by whom, in order to run metrics for processing time. Ideally this information would be recorded as Status changes and reassignments are recorded today, in the incident audit log.

    • Vimal Chopra

      Following ideas are similar and marking them duplicates. Please continue to vote and provide feedback in this Idea.

       

       

    • Sara Knetzger

      I totally agree with this idea.  Having visibility to each field modification (who completed the change, which field, when the change was completed and what the field was set as originally) would be extremely helpful.  I realize that this may make the transactions table exponentially larger, but the data is extremely valuable.  Thanks for considering this!

      Sara

    • Jared Terry

      Included in this should be audit log info concerning the adding and deleting of attachments.  Currently no way to tell if and when an attachment may have been deleted, etc.

    • Grant Malins

      This is a fantastic idea.   Salesforce.com has this and my users desperately want this too as multiple people are updating the same incidents (and CBOs).

    • Surej Gangadharan

      Yes, Absolutely correct. RightNow should consider this as a high priority, as most of the current CRMs are having this common feature, also the increasing business users are desperately looking for this to be enabled.  

    • Grant Malins

      Is this still "Under Consideration?" 

    • Stephen Pickett

      I agree - we need an update on this, Service Cloud is WAY behind competing CRM's.

      P.S. This is very painful in industries that require tight auditing facilities to prove what has and hasn't changed.

    • Vimal Chopra

      Hello everyone,

      Thanks for your continued interest in this feature and your updates. This is still "Under Consideration", we will update this idea to [In Development] once we start working on this.

      Thanks

      Vimal

    • Brian L.

      Posting that we would also appreciate this. The current audit log functionality is a major pain point, especially with over 600+ agents actively editing incidents and contacts.

    • Adva Ambar

      Hi,

      We are also really need this functionality to have better insight  on the audit for Severity, Dispositions changes and maybe also the ability to decide which custom fields will be tracked

       

      Thanks

    • Guy Van Ranst.

      Hello,

      Similar for our organization, we would like to see in the audit log who changed Severity and other drop-down values.

      Thanks

      Guy

    • Terri Meyers

      I totally agree with this idea. Having a tracking mechanism of who edited what, in a specific area and when is highly needed in today's world.  The current audit log is inadequate.

    • eileen neulinger

      Ideally we would be able to configure what fields (standard and custom) should be captured in the audit log.  Log would record the old value, new value, and user/date the change was made.
       

       

    • Stephen Pickett

      I feel this is really overdue a response from Oracle - as I've mentioned previously, Service Cloud is way behind competitors and we often have to disqualify from tenders where proper auditing facilities are required.

      When will this be delivered?