Skip navigation

True collaboration on a service request / questionnaire before final submit

score 495
You have not voted. Product Team Review

As a follow up to this discussion DWP-A: Questionnaire limits and collaboration workflow

I would like to ask for a new functionality to work together (collaborate) on a specific request BEFORE the request is submitted to the fulfillment side.

 

Please allow different people/roles/support groups to work on a service request in a sequential order and add more and more information to the request (= answer questions of the questionnaire) or add an approval sub tasks before the next information is added before the request is submitted.

 

The collaboration feature in 18.11 does not support such a scenario. We need a collaboration on building / completing request information to prepare it for submit.

 

Examples:

New joiner: A new employee will start to work for the company and several technical and also non technical things have to be prepared for day one. It's all about the same person. A new desk space, a badge to access buildings, rooms and maybe systems, a computer system, etc. One person will start with the very basic request data and based on that data the next person / role / department will add information and give it to the next group. Then somebody will validate all the data and perhaps ask for corrections and more information (iteration loop). If everything is complete and correct so far, then the person will approve the request and send the request to a group to finalize the request and submit it. Before this final submit step nothing has been done on the fulfillment side. It has only been a collection of information  by several involved roles in a sequential order (and maybe with an iteration process). After all the data has been collected the fulfillment systems will receive the data. There might be an Remedy ITSM application involved, but that is not required. Maybe several other systems are connected by a REST API and will receive the data to fulfill tasks on their side: An ERP system, an IDM system, facility services, security department, etc.

 

New environment for an application: End users may not have enough knowledge about all technical details that are required to prepare and deliver a new environment.  They request one or more new servers for their application, but they may know little about the exact sizing, OS versions, network implications, etc. They request a database, they may know the vendor, perhaps a version, but not necessarily whether they need a dedicated or a shared one. If a shared one, they may not know a server name. Maybe an Oracle cluster is available to host the new database instances. This all may not be answered by the first initial requester. In most cases a person with deeper knowledge of the dependencies and implications will finalize the request with the actual data for the requested environment, e.g. No. of CPUs, RAM size, Zoning, required firewall rules, target Oracle cluster, etc.

People do not want to fill different independent requests for a single dependent environment. They want to collaborate on one request with growing data and information until the request is ready to be submitted to create all required manual or automatic tasks in the fulfillment systems.

 

Bottom line: We need collaboration functionality to collect required data for the request by different people including approvals and iterations to correct or complete required information--> submit the request --> fulfill the request by different systems or persons.

 

To increase usability and traceability (controlling, revision) it should be possible to enable/disable certain areas of the questionnaire for editing. Perhaps questions can be grouped from a logical point of view in separated tabs. By this we would be able to set some questions RO for one role but RW for another role working together on the same request.

 

And as said before, the "more information" / "correct information" feature is important to be able to send a request back to a previous editor to improve data quality etc. A "reject" and "start from scratch" is a very bad idea.

 

If you, community users, think that this idea makes sense, please feel free to add your own use cases.

Comments

Vote history