New Setup Questions
Hi there! The company I work for is migrating from a competitor to Zendesk, and as part of the migration process we've had a few issues come up that we're not sure how to tackle. I was hoping to see if the community might be able to help. Thanks in advance!
- We are considering using macros to allow agents to escalate cases to higher level agents and also to transfer to other teams. Has anyone used macros to do this? If so, any recommendations on if we should note somehow that the ticket was escalated or transferred (i.e. a custom field or a tag) and if yes, how that was setup in your instance?
-
In the above scenario, does your instance use the macros to change the assigned to field to a specific group?
- We want to quarantine a large amount of tickets to keep them in a separate bucket while we work on an answer . Does anyone use a macro to add a quarantine tag/field? We're hoping by doing this to:
- Exclude the ticket from views and routing
- Have a special view just for quarantined tickets
- Quarantined tickets could be excluded from reporting and customer surveys
-
Hi Adam Kohen - welcome to the Zendesk Community!
Macros are a great way to manage escalations. Here's a community post you might want to check out: Improving Escalation Workflows Using Macros.
We'll see if we can get some other users in to this conversation as well to share their thoughts on your questions. -
Thank you Nicole!
-
Hi Adam,
Not knowing the reason you're sectioning off these tickets, or what type of work you're doing on them, it's hard to say what your best option would be. But there are a few ways that you could "hide" tickets that you're working on.
Views are probably the most flexible way, but if you're not careful, it's easy tickets to get lost because they don't qualify for any of the views that you've set up.
Groups are a little more permanent, but they give you the ability to control each user who has access to them, and a separate library of Macros and Views that can be made available to only people in that group.
Statuses are another option.
At our company, any tickets that come in are automatically assigned to our Support Group. Our support is split into two separate teams, and each team has their own Views that are structured around the different products they support. After tickets are escalated to be worked on by our development team, they get assigned to our Developers Group, and are set to the On-Hold Status. That way I can exclude those tickets from our normal views (which just show New and Open statuses by default). Assigning to the separate Developers group allows me to set different SLAs for those tickets, and limit the number of agents who can communicate with our developers. When I'm running reports, they typically exclude tickets from that Developers group. But I have the added benefit of comparing the total number of tickets in that group to quickly see how many of our tickets get sent up to our development teams.
Hopefully, some of this is helpful to you! Let me know if there's any other advice I can give.
-
Hello Adam,
We have built escalation workflows for some of our clients (we are a Zendesk partner). I think I understand what you are trying to achieve.
Reagan covered most of it in the previous answer already. Basically:
- Run macro (add tag + internal comment + assign to other group)
- Create view (include tag for "escalated tickets" + only visible to that group)
- Exclude tickets with that tag or in that group from existing views
- Exclude tickets with that tag or in that group from CSAT
However, I’m not sure about excluding them from reporting. If you need to do so because they are not related to your usual tickets you need custom reports where you exclude tickets with that tag or that group.
Hope that helps
Nils / Guidoo Services
-
Thanks Reagan and Nils! What you both said makes sense. I'll confer with my team and let them know about these suggestions. Appreciate all the help!
Please sign in to leave a comment.
5 Comments