Report tickets multiple end-user comments since last agent comment

Answered

5 Comments

  • Graeme Carmichael
    Community Moderator

    Kim

    I am not sure if this is possible. In GoodData we cannot be sure of the exact order of ticket events. In Explore, we do have a full timestamp of each event, but I do not know how to use that to get what you are after. Perhaps asking under the Explore community may provide a solution for you.

    What you are looking for is a really good idea. But all I can suggest is using Views to approximate what you are after. Views do have the advantage of being real time.

    For example:

    Meet all the conditions:

    • Ticket hours since requester update>Less than 10
    • Ticket Hours since assignee update>Greater than 10
    • Ticket Status > Less than Pending

    The problem is an assignee update does include field updates and not necessarily a public comment.

    So, you would have to use a combination of triggers and tags.

    To tag the first end user comment, a trigger could say:

    Meet all the conditions:

    • Current user is > End user
    • Tags > Contains None of the Following > First_Chase_By_Customer

    Actions:

    • Add Tags > First_Chase_By_Customer

    To tag the second comment:

    Meet all the conditions:

    • Current user is > End user
    • Tags > Contains At Least One of the Following > First_Chase_By_Customer
    • Tags > Contains None of the Following > Second_Chase_By_Customer

    Actions:

    • Add Tags > Second_Chase_By_Customer

    ... and you can keep going for subsequent chases by the customer, adding a corresponding tag each time.

    To reset the tags, you need one further trigger when an agent makes a public comment.

    Meet all the conditions:

    • Current user is > Agent
    • Comment is> Public

    Actions:

    • Remove tags> First_Chase_By_Customer, Second_Chase_By_Customer, Third_Chase_By_Customer....

     You can now create a view based on your tags:

    Meet all conditions:

    • Ticket status > Less than Pending

    Meet any conditions:

    • Ticket tags > Contains at least one of the following > First_Chase_By_Customer
    • Ticket tags > Contains at least one of the following > Second_Chase_By_Customer
    • Ticket tags > Contains at least one of the following > Third_Chase_By_Customer

    If you really want, after a customer reaches a critical level of chases, say 4, you can add a further tag Nagging_Customer but not remove this tag when the agent makes a public comment. You can then report on the tickets that have reached this critical stage.

    1
  • Kim Lake

    Thanks @Graeme, unfortunately we're not migrated across to Explore yet, so stuck with Insights. Really appreciate your detailed suggestion.

    I'll give it a brave attempt to adapt your recommendation into a scheduled report sent directly to stakeholders, rather than a view being manually exported.

    0
  • Kevin

    Graeme Carmichael To tag the second comment you say you would have the condition  "Tags > Contains None of the Following > First_Chase_By_Customer." It seems to me that if you wanted to ensure this was the second comment, you would need to ensure that tag was present in the ticket by using the "Contains At Least One Of The Following" condition. Otherwise, you'd be tagging the first comment and the second comment with the "Second_Chase_By_Customer" tag. Am I right?

    When you are creating the tags, I also do not understand why you first check that they are not present. For instance, when creating the tag for the first end-user comment, before adding "First_Chase_By_Customer" you check that "Tags > Contains None of the Following > First_Chase_By_Customer." Since you cannot add the same tag twice, why do this. Is this necessary for some reason I am unaware of?

    0
  • Graeme Carmichael
    Community Moderator

    Keven

    >ensure that tag was present in the ticket by using the "Contains At Least One Of The Following"> Yes that is a wee typo. Now fixed. Thank you.

    >When you are creating the tags, I also do not understand why you first check that they are not present> I think it reads better and stops the trigger firing with every update when it is not necessary. When you look at the trigger activity in admin, you would see the end user first update firing with every comment which would overstate its importance.

     

    0
  • Kevin

    Graeme Carmichael sorry for the late reply. 

    > ok good to know I was not going crazy and that was a typo!

    > I see, so checking first gives a better view of how often the trigger is used. So in function it is not necessary, but at a higher level for reporting how often triggers fire it is very helpful. Yes, I think that makes sense. Thank you for that explanation and this thread

    0

Please sign in to leave a comment.

Powered by Zendesk