1 of 1 people found this helpful
The main purpose that I and my customers have used teams is for redundancy of duties and responsibilities. I've answered your questions below:
- How can the creation and implementation of Teams in FootPrints maximize efficiency? It allows for efficiency due to the fact that you do not have to update a user list every time you have personnel changes, or responsibility changes. You go in and make an update to the team itself, not a rule, workflow, or email notice for instance.
- What are bests practices for determining when a team is required? When there is an assignment of a ticket, or approvals that have the possibility of not reaching someone due to an absence of any kind. Having a team as the assignee/approver, *in most cases* allows for a backup(s) to be present to take on the tasks needed for the ticket.
- What are best practices for determing the membership in teams? Whomever has the technical expertise to resolve/fulfill the ticket, or has the authority to approve.
- What are best practices for determining the scope of a respective team's purpose in FP? Again, technical expertise around these areas or the authority to be approvers. Their scope is dependent upon what that Workspace(s) purpose is.
- Is there a context where the existance of too many teams creates more problems than it solves? What is that threshold? I have not had the case where having too many teams is an issue. You should parse down the IT staff (or Workspace focused staff, i.e. Facilities, HR) into teams that are specific to an area of support.
- Is there a practical threshold for how many teams a singular agent may have membership? No, your agent/manager may be a member of every team you have
- Does one have any other recommendations in regards to the creation and usage of teams in FootPrints? I would maintain a focus for each team around a particular function within your Workspace(s). Make clear designations and easily recognized names such as IT Help Desk Support, Desk Side Support, HR Benefits, Facilities Plumbing, etc.
I hope this helps!
That's great feedback. I would love to engage this type of design. It would really enhance our efficiency.
At present, I have ran into one unintended consequence of having a user on multiple teams. We are on 20.18.03. When one starts typing the name of an individual, being able to select from the pop-up is great; however, if the individual is a member of many groups, each group also appears in the listing so that one has to weed through things to get to the proper selection (i.e., John Smith, HR Support.Jon Smith, Plant Ops Support.Jon Smith, etc.). I envision users throwing in the towel on the teams just because they don't like this trade off.
Anyone know of a way around it (a setting so that the search only returns individuals (sans team references) and team names?