0 Replies Latest reply on Jul 12, 2018 9:13 AM by Patricia Butcheck

    Change Management

    Patricia Butcheck

      I am brand new to the Change Management CM feature available in TrackIt 11.4. I think I understand the concept, but in practice I'm failing to find practical application. If I may tap into more experienced Admins, I'd like to see if my concepts are sounds, and how the tool can be best implemented for a QC project our team is trying to develop.

       

      My understanding of the CM concept: If someone asks to change something - the request is submitted to an authority for approval.  Approving, allows the process to be green-lit and to proceed.  Rejecting, denies it. Logs are kept to track this activity / approval, etc.

       

      My team's TrackIt request:  Use CM as a form of QC on particular (but frequent) complex procedures.  We want certain categories to trigger a 'review' process.  We are OK having the same tech check their teammates work and catch commons human mistakes.  So, if Tech A receives an XYZ request, it triggers a Change Mngt Policy that escalates to three techs (including original tech).  We would like to have the CM review team (consisting of Techs A, B, and C) review the request - QC the details - and approve/improve the procedures related to the original XYZ request.  The goal is to have the team check each other's work and sign off on it.

       

      Escalations / Oversight Question

      1. First problem: it seems that original Tech can prevent the CM Policy from being applied to ticket
      2. Second problem: It see the original Tech assigned to ticket - and who is also part of the Authorization/Approval list - is able to Authorize their own CM Policy
      3. If Tech A can over-ride the CM procedures and neutralize the CM application per ticket, is there a way to prevent this?
      4. We added Tech A, B & C to the CM Policy as Approver.  We set the policy type to Simultaneous.
        • The concept was that if Tech A triggered a CM Policy, then Tech B & C would receive the CM notification and would review and authorize/decline the CM.
        • If Tech B triggered the CM Policy, then Tech A & C would review and approve, etc.
        • I can see that by having the same techs listed as Approver, I am creating the authorization that I want to prevent - but I don't see a way of automating the CMP to go to differing techs based on who the original assigned technician is
      5. We want to have CMP get distributed to the same team, but exclude the assigned technician as an Approver - forcing the remaining teammates to QC the assigned techs work

       

      I fear this is probably a lack of imagination on my part. We want to QC each other's work, but I can't see a way to structure this.  If I could set the Type & Subtype to trigger a CM Policy - great. But I can't add the criteria of creating technician to the Policy.  If I could, I Would create 3 CM Policies to escalate to the remaining teammates.

       

      How would you structure the escalations to allow for team-QC?  Otherwise, the burden of approvals would land on ONE technician/supervisor and create a burden of work on one party.

       

      Web Portal Only

      Am I correct that the only way to handle change management methods is through the web portal and NOT in the TrackIt Technician Client app?

       

      Quality Control Goals

       

      Perhaps using the CM protocols is not the best way to handle our QC objectives.  Do you have recommendations on what can be done?  We want to automate this process as much as possible.  If our HelpDesk receives a particular type of request, we want to have the steps and documentation reviewed by more experienced technicians and have them review / approve  the process.   We don't want the helpdesk to have the ability to prevent this process or to interrupt the flow.

       

      Thanks in advance for taking the time to read this, and for any advice you can share.

       

      - Patti