Congratulations to our first customer and partner Infrastructure Technology Services who achieved ISO/IEC 20000:2005 certification with the support of ITE ITILExpress.
A.Rywaczuk, Sales Manager of I.T.S., said: "ITE ItilExpress allows us to control and optimize our service to more than 50 customers. We can implement our processes in new customers in a matter of days. It is easy for technicians and keeps control of SLAs and user satisfaction.
2009/11/19
RELEASE NOTES – 2009/11/10, ver. 2.4.1
Changes since last version:
-Added HTML support for mail formatting
-Security improvements
-Record Worked time for scheduled opperations
-Support group filter
-Daily due tasks notification
-Report of tickets for each Configuration Item
-Task categorization
-Support for more than one mail address per user
-Minor bug fixes
-Added HTML support for mail formatting
-Security improvements
-Record Worked time for scheduled opperations
-Support group filter
-Daily due tasks notification
-Report of tickets for each Configuration Item
-Task categorization
-Support for more than one mail address per user
-Minor bug fixes
2009/07/30
CMDB Relationships
We have been using different types of relationships inside the CMDB to link Configuration Items to one another. There is no limit to the types and number of these relationships and they can be fully customized to fit the client needs. The objective is to indicate which configuration items are related. For example, PC1 "is connected to" Printer3. Or License number XXX “is assigned to” SoftwareX.
These relationships will allow the user to know which items or services will be affected when a device presents a malfunction or any kind of problem. We think that the more information we have on the relationships field, the more accurate and precise the solution will be.
What do you think about creating these relationships?
Can you think of any crucial one that can not be let out?
Any ideas will be greatly appreciated.
Thanks!
These relationships will allow the user to know which items or services will be affected when a device presents a malfunction or any kind of problem. We think that the more information we have on the relationships field, the more accurate and precise the solution will be.
What do you think about creating these relationships?
Can you think of any crucial one that can not be let out?
Any ideas will be greatly appreciated.
Thanks!
2009/06/29
Customer Satisfaction Evaluation
Hello all, we are using a three question optional survey, sent automatically to each user after their ticket is closed.
These are the questions:
1 - How do you evaluate the ticket resolution?
2 - How do you evaluate the time required to solve your request?
3 - How do you evaluate the technician that worked on your request?
The user can rate it on a scale from 1 to 7 being 1 the worst and 7 the best.
1) I would greatly appreciate it if you tell me what you think about these questions and the rating mechanism being used?
2) What do you think we should do in order to encourage the user to answer the survey.
Thanks in advance
Regards
Juan Ignacio Staricco
These are some of the replies we got from senior itilers:
1-You may or may not agree,but I would make the questions a bit more user friendly, especially the first 2 questions, for example,the issue was resolved well and The issue was resolved in a timely manner
How about a lucky draw prize for one lucky survey respondent? Even if it's a box of KK Donuts
DYbeach
2-You sell the benefits to the customer (senior managers) first, not the users. The nuisance value has to be compensated by real benefits (service improvements?) Then these senior managers will encourage their staff to respond.
You make it easy to do. good online design helps. But you keep it business-like.
You publish regular reports (graphs are good), including the service review deliberations on the figures. This shows you are engaged and listening.
You stick to the same questions until a good reason comes for adding or removing one or more and then you explain the reasons.
I'm not good at gimmicks (I don't like doing them and I hate being on the receiving end, but that's just me). If you can do it right ... go ahead. It works for some.
Don't always spin the results into "good" news. People remember the bad days and so you might as well acknowledge them.
Your questionnaires and your reports should always make people feel involved.
Diarmid
3-This type of survey is very dangerous as it might lead you to wrong decisions:
There should be SLAs in place that normally lead the way you handle tickets. These SLAs should have been built taking into account how much your customer is willing to pay for the service, which is usually lower than what he would need to pay to make the users happy.
Therefore, if you dont recall in the question what the SLA for that spécific case was, you might get an answer to A: "how was the service vs what I hope" rather than to B: "how was the service vs what I am entitled to expect".
unless you want to measure whether the SLA can meet users' expectations, getting an answer to A when you want to measure your performance towards B is very misleading.
jpgilles
4-First off I would only give a rating of 1-5. Easier to run your stats through and 1 does not seem as bad on the lower scale
It is very difficult to survey without leading the questions or resulting in people marking extremes. If it was OK they mark 5, if it was not so good 1.
I ask users to simply rate the quality of the service with a 1 to 5 star rating. It sums up experience in one end user click on closure of a ticket. I think the "Itunes", "Twitter" and "Facebook' savvy end users at my site like this and we get 90% response rate on the rating. Anything that takes more than a quick click is usually ignored (unless they have something negative to say).
However you may wish more from your survey and if you do, I would aim to send only one more extensive survey each year - rather than the multi choice on each closure.
Only my personal view though. I am not a big fan of any sort of survey (unless you need to justify your existence as master of surveys!
inrepose
Any other comments will be more than welcome so please feel free to do so.
Regards,
The ItilExpress Team
These are the questions:
1 - How do you evaluate the ticket resolution?
2 - How do you evaluate the time required to solve your request?
3 - How do you evaluate the technician that worked on your request?
The user can rate it on a scale from 1 to 7 being 1 the worst and 7 the best.
1) I would greatly appreciate it if you tell me what you think about these questions and the rating mechanism being used?
2) What do you think we should do in order to encourage the user to answer the survey.
Thanks in advance
Regards
Juan Ignacio Staricco
These are some of the replies we got from senior itilers:
1-You may or may not agree,but I would make the questions a bit more user friendly, especially the first 2 questions, for example,the issue was resolved well and The issue was resolved in a timely manner
How about a lucky draw prize for one lucky survey respondent? Even if it's a box of KK Donuts
DYbeach
2-You sell the benefits to the customer (senior managers) first, not the users. The nuisance value has to be compensated by real benefits (service improvements?) Then these senior managers will encourage their staff to respond.
You make it easy to do. good online design helps. But you keep it business-like.
You publish regular reports (graphs are good), including the service review deliberations on the figures. This shows you are engaged and listening.
You stick to the same questions until a good reason comes for adding or removing one or more and then you explain the reasons.
I'm not good at gimmicks (I don't like doing them and I hate being on the receiving end, but that's just me). If you can do it right ... go ahead. It works for some.
Don't always spin the results into "good" news. People remember the bad days and so you might as well acknowledge them.
Your questionnaires and your reports should always make people feel involved.
Diarmid
3-This type of survey is very dangerous as it might lead you to wrong decisions:
There should be SLAs in place that normally lead the way you handle tickets. These SLAs should have been built taking into account how much your customer is willing to pay for the service, which is usually lower than what he would need to pay to make the users happy.
Therefore, if you dont recall in the question what the SLA for that spécific case was, you might get an answer to A: "how was the service vs what I hope" rather than to B: "how was the service vs what I am entitled to expect".
unless you want to measure whether the SLA can meet users' expectations, getting an answer to A when you want to measure your performance towards B is very misleading.
jpgilles
4-First off I would only give a rating of 1-5. Easier to run your stats through and 1 does not seem as bad on the lower scale
It is very difficult to survey without leading the questions or resulting in people marking extremes. If it was OK they mark 5, if it was not so good 1.
I ask users to simply rate the quality of the service with a 1 to 5 star rating. It sums up experience in one end user click on closure of a ticket. I think the "Itunes", "Twitter" and "Facebook' savvy end users at my site like this and we get 90% response rate on the rating. Anything that takes more than a quick click is usually ignored (unless they have something negative to say).
However you may wish more from your survey and if you do, I would aim to send only one more extensive survey each year - rather than the multi choice on each closure.
Only my personal view though. I am not a big fan of any sort of survey (unless you need to justify your existence as master of surveys!
inrepose
Any other comments will be more than welcome so please feel free to do so.
Regards,
The ItilExpress Team
2009/05/12
ITIL®Express Help
Help documentation is now available.
This document will be updated regularly as we add new features to the application.
Take a look! http://www.itilexpress.com/dokuwiki
This document will be updated regularly as we add new features to the application.
Take a look! http://www.itilexpress.com/dokuwiki
2009/04/24
RELEASE NOTES – 2009/04/24, ver. 2.2
Changes since the last version 2.1:
New version that brings more functionalities and data flow control.
- Scheduled Tasks Module
- SLA Notifications
- Service Desk Reports
Minor issues/changes:
- When changing client inside CMDB, the CI list refreshes automatically now without the need of clicking the refresh button.
- Telephone field added to Client information.
- Tooltip icon added to show requesting user information on both Incidents and Service requests ticket types.
- Password change option when user clicks on his username.
- All four ticket type report buttons have been merged into one in order to reduce the quantity of buttons on the report section.
- The configuration lists have been reprogrammed to show more or less data depending on the user permissions.
- The search filter has been repositioned.
- Wrong redirection bug corrected when using the search filter and then trying to access one of the results given by it.
Fixed Bugs:
- Corrected some grammar mistakes on a few tags.
- When clicking the Clear button on the ticket list, all the filters were activated. This has been corrected.
- Purchases without quotes are not shown on the report.
- Fixed non working link when the user received an email regarding the ticket closure.
- Minor bug fixes
New version that brings more functionalities and data flow control.
- Scheduled Tasks Module
- SLA Notifications
- Service Desk Reports
Minor issues/changes:
- When changing client inside CMDB, the CI list refreshes automatically now without the need of clicking the refresh button.
- Telephone field added to Client information.
- Tooltip icon added to show requesting user information on both Incidents and Service requests ticket types.
- Password change option when user clicks on his username.
- All four ticket type report buttons have been merged into one in order to reduce the quantity of buttons on the report section.
- The configuration lists have been reprogrammed to show more or less data depending on the user permissions.
- The search filter has been repositioned.
- Wrong redirection bug corrected when using the search filter and then trying to access one of the results given by it.
Fixed Bugs:
- Corrected some grammar mistakes on a few tags.
- When clicking the Clear button on the ticket list, all the filters were activated. This has been corrected.
- Purchases without quotes are not shown on the report.
- Fixed non working link when the user received an email regarding the ticket closure.
- Minor bug fixes
2009/04/14
RELEASE NOTES – 2009/04/14, ver. 2.1
Changes since the last version 2.0
- Added User Satisfaction Evaluation Module
- Added Alarm system
- New Report options now also including: Evaluations, Evaluation Chart and Service Desks
- Improved the security system to Access pages depending on user role
- New User Roles with distinctive permissions in order to limit access to data
Minor issues/changes:
- Added “Report by Support Group” option inside Incidents Report
- When entering a new ticket via e-mail as a technician, the way that you have to enter the requesting users email changed from /email@domain.com/ to [email@domain.com]
Fixed bugs:
- When the service desk received an e-mail from an unregistered user, the system sent an automatic reply to the sender apart from forwarding the e-mail to the support group. This caused some problems when the sender was Spam. This has been corrected so that only registered users get a confirmation reply that their ticket has been received.
- Minor bug fixes
- Added User Satisfaction Evaluation Module
- Added Alarm system
- New Report options now also including: Evaluations, Evaluation Chart and Service Desks
- Improved the security system to Access pages depending on user role
- New User Roles with distinctive permissions in order to limit access to data
Minor issues/changes:
- Added “Report by Support Group” option inside Incidents Report
- When entering a new ticket via e-mail as a technician, the way that you have to enter the requesting users email changed from /email@domain.com/ to [email@domain.com]
Fixed bugs:
- When the service desk received an e-mail from an unregistered user, the system sent an automatic reply to the sender apart from forwarding the e-mail to the support group. This caused some problems when the sender was Spam. This has been corrected so that only registered users get a confirmation reply that their ticket has been received.
- Minor bug fixes
2009/03/29
SaaS Advantages
Our Software As A Service Model allows for quick support, fast delivery of updates, new releases and lower costs.
Some people say thay don't like to have info on a hosted environment.
We say, people have e-mails, ERPs, CRMs and much more sensitive data on hosted environments without a problem. Why not their support tickets? Comments?
New Customer Satisfaction Evaluation Module
New module allows users to evaluate the ticket.
They receive a link by e-mail where they access the three evaluation options available directly.
Charts and Reports are available including a report suggesting tickets that need to be evaluated (For phone evaluation) to achieve an established percentage of evaluated tickets.
2009/03/28
New Blog
Hi this blog intends to provide insight to ITE ItilExpress Service Management Software. The idea is to provide here news, tips, features discussions and other relevant info.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
