Aaron Doane

Please give a quick overview of your product feature request or feedback and note who in your org is affected by this issue [ex. agents, admins, customers, etc.]. (2-3 sentences)

When updating the skills assigned to a ticket via a Trigger, you have the option to add, remove, or set skills. When selecting the Remove or Set options, you are required to define the exact skills you are removing or setting. You do not have the option to set Skills = Null, or Remove All Skills. 

What problem do you see this solving? (1-2 sentences) 

When building out workflows and a a sequence of triggers to assign skills, sometimes it makes sense to remove all skills and send a ticket back down the full list of triggers to reassign skills. For example, if a ticket was completely miscategorized (often by an end user) and the ticket needs to be redefined and moved to a different group, the ticket needs to have all of it's skills unassigned and let the process run again to reassign skills. Otherwise, unnecessary skills remain attached, causing delays in ticket assignment. 

When was the last time you were affected by this lack of functionality, or specific tool? What happened? How often does this problem occur and how does this impact your business? (3-4 sentences)

As we adopt Skills-Based routing, this is becoming an increasingly large problem, impacting us daily. If not accounted for, tickets are not assigned in a timely manner, hurting our First Reply Time. 

Are you currently using a workaround to solve this problem? (If yes, please explain) (1-2 sentences)

I'm creating a trigger that is set to Remove skills and listing every available skill. Each time a skill is added to the Skills list, I need to update this trigger as well. 

What would be your ideal solution to this problem? How would it work or function? (1-2 sentences)

Either an option to Remove All Skills, or an option to Set Skills = Null via triggers. 

This would be a great feature to add and would help reduce unnecessary backlog. This would be similar to the link that customers can use to solve their ticket from a automated response. 

Agreed. We use custom agent statuses more than the general ones. It would be great to customize which ones show. Maybe by role or by group? 

I'm hoping someone else has run into this before and might have a solution. Currently, if multiple tickets from the same customer are about the same topic, we have the option to merge tickets, but it would be more useful to be able to designate a ticket as a “Follow-Up” to a prior ticket, allowing agents to quickly see that this is a repeat issue. 

Currently, customers can generate follow-up tickets when replying to a closed ticket, or an agent can create a follow-up ticket from a closed ticket, but there is no way to create the “follow-up” linkage manually. 

Has anyone else run into this use case?

Thanks!

Lara McCaleb I was in the same boat, but the advanced SLA rules that were recently released solved this problem. 

That being said, there was a bug with them and they were rolled back. https://support.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/7411959450778-Announcing-advanced-SLA-configuration-settings

I recently reached out to support asking if they were going to be re-released and it sounds like they are hoping to do so sometime in Q1 2025. Depending on how complex your SLAs are, the bug they are addressing may not actually impact you (it did not impact us). I would reach out to your support team and see if any exception can be made and these settings can be turned back on. 

With the advanced settings, I made a clone of each of my ticket SLAs and specified they were only for Voice channels. I then used the Advanced SLA settings to activate the First Reply SLA for Private Comments only for voice tickets. This worked like a charm until the settings were rolled back. Depending on how your SLAs are configured, you may be able to request an exception and have these settings turned back on. 

Side Conversations work great for this! 

Once this option is turned on in the Admin settings, you will be able to select the “Create Child Ticket” option from the little menu that pops up when hovering over a comment. 

Newly added options allow you to copy the requester, ticket form, tags, and followers as well. 

https://support.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/4408836521498-Using-side-conversation-child-tickets

This same exact conversation just came up today with one of my agents. We have been using Side Conversations internally and are expanding it's usage to be more customer-facing. This would be an amazing enhancement. 

We have been experiencing this same issue recently as well. We entered a support ticket and we were told that it was caused by expired or corrupted cookies, as was mentioned above. This has only provided short-term relief and users are starting to show some frustration with the app. 

We have users reporting the issue almost daily at this point and it's requiring folks to either clear their cookies regularly, or in some cases completely reinstall the add-on. We also only started seeing this behavior at the end of September. 

Is it possible there is something more at play than just outdated cookies? Thanks!

Thank you for the opportunity to join this EAP and provide feedback!

The functionality I was specifically interested in was the ability to default the Set child ticket fields prompts. Before doing this, I met with our Zendesk Admin team and ultimately decided the functionality wouldn't actually serve our needs as well as I initially thought it would. 

The use case that I was hoping to solve for was specifically for teams who use Side Conversations to create child tickets or escalations within their department. In this case, agents often forget to select the Set child ticket fields options to include the form and tags, so defaulting this to include the Ticket Form would be a time saver. However, this use cases didn't account for the teams that use side conversations to create cross-team tickets, which often have a different ticket form associated with them. After reviewing how side conversations are used across our organization, we determined that defaulting the child ticket's form to match the parent ticket would not net any actual benefit. It would make life easier for 50% of the organization, and then require the other 50% to un-check the box. Currently, we are solving some of this with triggers and this would not change that. 

What I was really hoping to see in this enhancement was what I've outlined here. Our agents almost never create a side conversation from scratch. We create macros to create a sort of template, add links, and give the agent something to start with. Having the ability to select which check boxes apply in the macro would solve all of our needs in this area and allow us to save agents time and obsolete various triggers we are using now to set the form fields. 

We'll continue to explore the other features in this EAP, but wanted to be sure to provide feedback on this particular one. Thanks again for letting us try it out!