Does anyone see the benefit for giving the agent the ability to send a reply back to the contact with HTML formatting instead of plain text? Personally I'd like to use bold, italics, bulleted/numbered lists, and other types of formatting commonly found in an email client. I would even go one step further and allow for inline images to be dropped in, much like the functionality here within the Lithium forum.

This idea has been around for awhile and I'm guessing we'll get closer to it now that CP is emerging. When discussing it with RightNow we refer to it as "dynamic forms". Think of it this way... you're at the Ask a Question page and the first field at the top is the product (or category). Based on the product that's selected the entire form can change. You can literally custom capture unique incident information based on that product. For instance, let's say you're an IT help desk and your topics (products) include Hardware, Software, Networking Issues, Email, etc. If the end-user selects Hardware then the form changes and includes fields about the type of peripheral device, serial number, warranty info, etc. If it's a software issue then the form contains fields about the software title, version, license number, etc. Networking Issues may include questions/fields about connection speed, type, firewall enabled, etc. There are endless uses for this type of functionality especially when you factor in what you could do with the analytics behind it.

 

Again, I'm hoping we're closer to seeing this feature within CP but that would be under the caveat that it's generally available and can be configured via a menu system rather than having to dive in and massage the code.

New functionality allows RightNow to lock the account of a user who has been idle for a certain amount of thime.  This does not log them out of the system, but requires the user to enter their password again to continue.

 

We are aware of some users who lock their desktops at the end of the day and go home, leaving all applications logged in.  This uses a valuable concurrent log in slot...

At present there is no log for administrators changes(who, when, description of changes such as:

- changes to staff accounts(who created, who edited)

-rule logs changes(when changes were made , by who, what changes)

-Custom Fields(who created, when)

It is good to have this

Currently, when an incident is being edited,  it is not locked.

 

Suggest:

Lock incidents when being edited, so that other users are unable to edit till current editing is completed and saved.

Concept:  Allow Pick Lists and Hierarchy Structures to be custom field types.

 

The reasoning behind Pick Lists (which are menu's that allow you to select multiple items) is that often choices are not Mutually Exclusive.  For example, we use custom fields to control which interfaces out KB content should be available too; instead of having 5 yes/no custom fields for each interface, it would be great to have 1 custom field that we could simply check off the interfaces the content should be available too.

 

The reasoning behind the Hierarchy Structures (similar to products/categories) is to provide more granular detail on selections.  For example, if we want to use dispositions as a general concept of what general activity was used to resolve the issue, our product team still wants to know the specific issue that caused the problem; so having a very granular hierarchy selection to further define what bug/issue the incident was related to would be very helpful.  A second example - our tickets are escalated often to different departments, but the initial Customer Service person is still 'responsible' for the ticket.  We have an 'Owner' field, but it is a single manually controlled drop down menu that gets very long, as it contains all of the names of people who could be 'Ticket Owners'.  Being able to replicate the 'Assigned' drop down menu with a 'Group/Staff Account' like structure would make for much better usage.

 

~Chris

[Edited to include less hyperbole - that part is not constructive ]

 

Concept:  I think everyone knows that I'm a RightNow Enthusiast, but I have to say the editor used to create and edit Answers is the bane of my existenace.

 

• The spacing is often off
• The font/style type sometimes doesn't match what you ask it to
• The numbering and bulleting doesn't space properly - specifically if changing back and forth between the two
• If you insert an image between numbering to highlight a point, the numbering always starts from 1 again
• Inserting images is a multi-step process, depending on where you are storing the images

 

So, a few suggestions for updating:

 

• Allow pasting in images and text all at once, and let the applications parse out the images and store them (charge me for storage, I'll pay extra).
• Convert from Word and PDF - yes, its hard, but our lives would be so much better with this feature.  Add a button like 'Import from File', and allow us to select file formats that you've figured out how to convert.  Don't convert word into the silly mso style html, but really convert it .
• Update to a better Rich Text Formating system to resolve issues mentioned above, with spacing/numbering, etc.

Many of our console users have multiple roles, and it would be very helpful for them to be able to switch account profiles without asking to be reassigned to another account profile or utilizing multiple console accounts.

 

Use case: "Administrator" needs to test as a "Knowledge Base Author"

 

What happens today: "Administrator" sets him or herself up as a Knowledge Base Author profile temporarily for the purposes of testing, then switches back to Administrator profile.

 

What should happen: If "Administrator" has the rights to logon as a different profile, provide a drop down list of roles/profiles at login time.  Also offer the ability to switch profiles during a session (either to spawn a new console session or to change the context of the current session)

With all these new 'ideas' for improvements and changes coming out, I want to make sure that RightNow's employees know that the RightNow customer base appreciates all of the hard work that goes into even the smallest update/tweak/fix.  The product is already a great solution which has made many of our lives easier, and has and will continue to improve our relationships with our customers.

 

So, to make sure this doesn't get lost in the mix, "Keep up the good work - you're appreciated!".

 

~Chris

For many of our help desk sites we receive repeated requests for a parent-child incident relationship feature. Here's a scenario: an incident comes and the problem is identified, assigned, etc. Ten minutes later another incident comes in from a different contact reporting the same problem. This continues over the span of a few hours and you end up with 15 incidents submitted by different contacts but relates to the same issue. The idea is to identify one of these incidents as the "parent" and then file the others as "children" so that they're grouped together (assuming via a report on the incident workspace). When the incident is closed on the parent it closes the child incidents as well. Ideally it would be nice to have it set up where if the agent response is sent from the parent it also sends it from the children and the statuses change accordingly. Other config settings could also be tied into the relationship, e.g. status, disposition, etc.

 

I know this is possible because we currently pay Pro Services to set it up for us but from what I understand it's a pretty straightforward customization and therefore it would be great to have it available in general release.

In a word "Versioning'. That is 'Answer Versioning'.

 

I know a CMS would be nice but we just need to be able to stage updates to Answers and be able to release them into production on a certain day.

 

We too have software releases.  In addition to a slew of new Answers we need to be able to stage updates to existing answers with new information and have those changes reviewed. 

 

Scenario:

  Anna from (Technical Publications) has a set of updates to existing answers that are effected by a software release next week.  She opens the Staging version of a current Answer and edits it.  She sets the 'Replace" date appropriately but knows that it still has to go through the approval cycle so she sets it to "Review".

 

Mary Lee in QA reviews the doc and approves it.

 

Lou in Support reviews the doc and approves it.

 

It is set to 'Ready" and on the appropriate date it the Answer text is swapped with the production text and I get to sleep in.

I would love to be able to move users without having to show permanently disabled users. If showing disabled users must be enabled can these user be highlighted differently (red dot beside the name?).

 

 

Many times, we receive requests to unlock a user's account (especially if they work with different tools using different credentials).

 

To support our global needs, we also have to grant admin rights to supervisors so that they can unlock the user's accounts themselves. This represents a risk to the database if several admins alter staff accounts at the same time. The "page is locked" feature doesn't really work as one would still get the error even if the respective persons closed the Staff Management page long time ago, so overriding the lock becomes a necessity.

 

Proposal: As used on many commercial and operational platforms, add to the login screen a password reset feature - which emails to the recorded email address in the staff account. 

 

Thanks.

 

Kind regards,

 

Karim Michael Hambach

TomTom Sales BV

Dear RNT Team,

 

For our multi-channel and international business purposes, we maintain more than 350 business rules, already optimized with the help of a tune-up session. It is often a challenge to document and track changes, especially when dealing with multiple owners on those rules.

 

It would be fantastic if it would be possible to report, print-out or export business rules.

 

Key features list in order of priority:

• Report on business rules 
• Export to raw excel, visio or text
• Append ownership and revision history to business rules (who changed what when, if possible with comment line (the description box is too generic)

 

Thanks in advance for considering this feature in future releases. ;-)

 

Kind regards,

 

Karim Michael Hambach
TomTom Sales BV - Amsterdam

We need to be able to restrict interface access by Org or Contact.  We have 3 (and soon possibly 5) interfaces.  There is no way to keep someone with a log on to one interface from accessing another interface.

 

Scenario:

 

Jon (contact at MegaCorp) can log into interface 1, ask questions and view Answers.  He can also log into the Consulting only interface 2 and see things he should not like a custom menu on the Ask A Question page with a list of all of our customer orgs.  He can also log in to the HelpDesk, Interface 3, which is for Employees to communicate with IT.  They could Ask a Question of our Internal IT department which is totally inappropriate.

 

Just want to keep the keep the foxes out of the hen houses and the hens out of the garden.

 

Currently, RN does not give us an option to specify logging levels in Audit Log.

 

It would be much more useful if the admins can specify which field(s) changes to log in the workspace designer. They are then shown in "What" section. (e.g. status changed from "In Progress" to "On Hold" in Incident). Currently we only see simple details in "What" section (e.g. Edited, Changed Status, Assigned etc). In many cases, business requirements demand more detailed level of logging on certain fields.

 

I suggest that RN provides the funtionality for admins to specify fields to be audited (to x number of fields maximum). The x  limit ensures that the log does not become too massive and we have control of monitoring only the fields we require.

 

Thanks in advance for looking into this,

It would be great to have control over when the New and especially the  Updated answer tags appear. Currently any change to an answer such as fixing a typo, minor content, etc triggers the Updated flag. Instead it would be nice to control these flags much like you would with the answer notification feature where the content publisher can decide if the change to the answer warrants a flag.

I think it would be a nice addition for staff to have the ability to talk to each other through the agent desktop. The IM could allow agents to send each other answer links as well as asking for assistance on an incident.

I'd definately like to hold my agents responsible for using the 'Fill Inbox' button per policy.. but currently, I have to use my 'poker face' each time I tell them my reports show that they weren't hitting it .

 

So - could we add a reporting mechanism to show how often staff accounts hit the 'fill inbox' button, and how many tickets they get from it?

 

Chris

It seems 4 releases per year is a bit agressive in rooting out all bugs associated with a release.  I would suggest reducing the number and doing more regression and QA testings between versions.