Spawn new ticket from reply

未計画

238 コメント

  • Lewis Stancer
    コメントアクション Permalink

    +1

    0
  • Esmaeil Khaksari
    コメントアクション Permalink

    @Jake,

    Agreed on both points: (1) Certainly increases the possibility for confusion. (2) Solving & closing cases would help in this regard.

    However, these are not really sufficient.  There are many scenarios where the customer has sufficient time, before a case is closed, to insert unrelated questions into the case.

    Please consider this possible enhancement as a way to encourage better granularity in reporting, quicker close times, etc. 

    0
  • Tim Ingham
    コメントアクション Permalink

    This would be very useful for us aswell. We also get tickets re-opned with new, unrelated enquiries so a simple way to split and create a new ticket from this would be good.

    Also, we also get requests that require the attention of multiple groups so it would be useful to be able split the original request into multiple ones that would allow us to re-assign with just the relevant information in the comments box.

    0
  • Esmaeil Khaksari
    コメントアクション Permalink

    @Tim,

     

    That's a great point about breaking out certain responses where multiple people are copied on the ticket.

    0
  • Dan Denson
    コメントアクション Permalink

    This would be a BIG improvement.  Our last helpdesk software did this with ease.  This is one of only a few things that the other product did better (while zendesk does so many others MUCH better).

     

    use cases are very must as listed above

    1: user replies to a solved ticket with a new subject. desired behavior: pull recent comment into new ticket, revert previous ticket to original state

    2: user sends multiple requests in single ticket. desired behavior: highlight text in ticket, hit split and highlighted text is used for new ticket, original contacts and cc are brought over.

    0
  • Joe Jenkins
    コメントアクション Permalink

    Jake Holman had said above that he believes that this could cause the user to be more confused.  In my case, this isn't it at all. They're already confused (or just lacking understanding of helpdesk operation and need more  training) and are just replying to whatever the last comment they had in their inbox.  I find that if I copy and paste their new question, which is in many cases to a "re-opened ticket" which is what it is 9 times out of 10, they start to respond to their new ticket as they see the subject makes sense to their new question.  

    So, I think what the users here are asking for, and I agree, is that we need the ability to "Create new ticket from reply";  It can then prompt us for a new subject, auto-populate the name with the spawning comment's requester or ask for one in the event that the spawning comment was an agent.  You can auto-relate the two if you want as part of the logic in a similar fashion that merges occur.  Something simple as "New ticket created from "Ticket ##### Subject of previous ticket" on the first line that the agent creating the new ticket would have the option of removing as part of their reply.  

    This workflow seems easy and would be simple for most helpdesk operators to navigate.

    It gets my vote.

    0
  • Lyman Benton
    コメントアクション Permalink

    I appreciate Jake's concern, but I don't think that this widely requested feature should be overlooked because of a projection that end users may not reply to the correct message.

    Here's why:

    1) Our users are pretty good at responding to the last, most relevant-looking email like Jjenkins said above

    2) We track which of our agents handles/solves the most tickets -- and this number is inaccurate if we have some agents handling several issues in one ticket. (Currently, those agents have to manually create separate tickets and it is a bit of a pain.)

    I hope this helps show why it is such a requested feature.

    0
  • Viacheslav Tikhomirov
    コメントアクション Permalink

    +1

    0
  • Andrew J
    コメントアクション Permalink

    Looks to be a popular feature request... yup, split tickets... for when users ask for more than one problem on one ticket.

    0
  • Julie Allison
    コメントアクション Permalink

    We have this requirement also - would like to be able to create a trigger or automation that allows us to create a new ticket when any existing ticket is changed to solved - the new ticket would be assigned as a task for our  documentation team - this way we can measure this team's responsiveness and workload also.

    Can someone advise if this will ever be a feature - looks like this request was originally raised in 2009?

    0
  • Nick McLarty
    コメントアクション Permalink

    +1

    I agree with all the case examples made above.  I have users that just hold onto the last email they got from me, and the next time they need something they just reply to that email which either re-opens the ticket if it's in a solved state, or creates a follow-up if the ticket has closed.  In the first case, I'd like to be able to split it to a new ticket.  In the second case, I'd like to remove the follow-up flag.

    On the subject of follow-ups, it would also be very helpful to manually create a follow-up ticket from an existing open ticket.  That way, if we did have to split it into two separate tickets (but not necessarily a problem/incident scenario following the ITIM model), they can still be shown as related to each other.

    0
  • Carlos Alvarez
    コメントアクション Permalink

    I have the same problem and it's making us mildly crazy.  At least 30% of our users simply reply to an old ticket in order to start a new one.  Sometimes they change the subject thinking that will make it clear, but of course they don't know about the in-reply-to header.

    0
  • Chris McDonald
    コメントアクション Permalink

    +1

    My 2-cents on this, in reply to Jake (sorry if anyone already made this point...tl;dr) is:

    Why not just build a Split button.  Then agents like me can use it.  You don't like it?  Fine.  Don't click the button.  Problem solved.  For me, I think that ZenDesk can please all groups by creating an optional button that agents can take or leave as they best see fit.  If you're worried about agents acting differently within a single helpdesk, then consider adding permissions to use the button.  I still think that this is a great feature request for lots of usecases and helpdesks.  Big +1.

    0
  • Carlos Alvarez
    コメントアクション Permalink

    Yeah, I don't see confusion as an issue.  As it is, we regularly change the subject of tickets since end users often enter useless things like their own company name, and they seem to get it.  That would be part of the splitting process.

    0
  • Andrew J
    コメントアクション Permalink

    I agree, this is a common issue for us.  More techincally challenged users prefer to reply to an email.  We have users regularly replying to emails over a year old.  For some, re-education is not probable. 

    0
  • Stuart Hall
    コメントアクション Permalink

    Opened a ticket for same request today. This happens almost daily. More of a need than a want for us. Easier to adjust the system to the users than the users to the system.

    0
  • Lyman Benton
    コメントアクション Permalink

    Another use for spawning new tickets is for assigning to other departments.

    For example, I sometimes have to assign one task to be done by our server/email administrators, and another task to be quoted out by a programmer simultaneously, both originating from the same ticket.

    I'm glad this has received some extra attention recently; I was beginning to worry there weren't enough of us that wanted this option!

    0
  • Carlos Alvarez
    コメントアクション Permalink

    A user just included a billing question along with an ongoing tech thread.  Would have been nice to split it instead of manually creating a new billing ticket and copy/pasting the info.  This is no less confusing to the user than just splitting the ticket.

    0
  • Rob Pezely
    コメントアクション Permalink

    I would definitely use the split/spawn/create new ticket from an existing ticket feature.  Please add this feature.

    0
  • Glenn Benge
    コメントアクション Permalink

    +1 from me

    although I think the requirement can be tweaked.

     

    The issue: there's an (rogue) entry against a ticket, that doesn't belong to that ticket.

     

    Using the rogue entry to SPAWN a new ticket is a great option, but to MOVE the entry to an EXISTING ticket should be also be an option. Reading through the comments above, and from personal experience, there's many circumstances where clients respond to one ticket, when in fact they're providing content for another existing ticket.

     

    and which ever action to taken (spawn new / move) Zendesk would need to automatically add appropriate audit trail info to both tickets to enable the action to be fully tacked.

    0
  • Spike
    コメントアクション Permalink

    YES YES YES!  

    0
  • Anthony Carter
    コメントアクション Permalink

    For Companies that track a "per incident" request, this would be an absolute requirement.  If a customer opens a ticket with 10 different requests, that is 10 different tickets, not 1.

    Even without a per incident business plan, one would like to keep 1 incident per ticket so as to have a direct correlation between the ticket subject/description and the contents of the ticket itself.

    We also have, potentially, 2 weeks between solve and closed because that is our process.  There are times when we want to create a follow-up before the case is closed.  A tool such as Zendesk should not impose a change in processes and policies, but fit into the existing processes and this is one area where process change is needed our side...

    0
  • Carlos Alvarez
    コメントアクション Permalink

    In the last few weeks this has become more and more of a problem for us.  We get multiple people working on an issue, so the next person shoots off a new e-mail, or there are issues that recur/take time to resolve so they forget they have an open ticket.  Right now I have five tickets for one issue for one customer.  One person is answering a new ticket with an answer already given in ticket #2, and another had given an answer that was already in ticket #1.

    0
  • Carlos Alvarez
    コメントアクション Permalink

    I posted too early.  However, they then throw some information about another issue into ticket 5, and we'd already handled THAT problem in ticket 4, but hadn't been able to spin off a new case about it.  We have a small case load, can't imagine how this plays out in a big organization.

    0
  • Vincent
    コメントアクション Permalink

    +3

    0
  • Eli Blankers
    コメントアクション Permalink

    +1.  I think it wouldn't be out of the realm of possibility to let us, the people running our desks, to decide whether or not this would be a good decision for our own company.  I understand it may be a huge confusion for some companies or their clients.  My company, however, works with very few clients, at a very intimate level.  Our clients get very comfortable with ZenDesk, and understand its use.  If I was able to split tickets into multiple tickets, my clients would know that I am acknowledging EVERY issue they bring, which is definitely the level of service I plan on giving.

    0
  • Jason Nassi
    コメントアクション Permalink

    +1 as well. Doesn't matter how fast we move tickets to Solved, customers still ask new off-topic questions on existing threads sooner than Closed comes into play. We wind up getting tickets dragging on for days that span multiple topics and multiple agents, and wind up skewing the data in a myriad of ways. Splitting comments into a new ticket would be massively beneficial for us.

    0
  • YellowWebMonkey
    コメントアクション Permalink

    +1

    Even though there could be confusion, please give us the feature and then we can use our judgment about what is the best course of action for that particular ticket.

    It would work best for me if there were small icons at the bottom of the comment itself.  This would allow us to make that particular comment into a new ticket (SPLIT) or move that particular comment into an existing ticket.  Thanks!

    0
  • Justin Fain
    コメントアクション Permalink

    +1.

    We really need this feature.  Thanks!

    0
  • Rob Colver
    コメントアクション Permalink

    We also badly need this feature.  When customer continue an existing case rather than starting a new one, it plays havoc with the SLA stats.

    0

投稿コメントは受け付けていません。

Powered by Zendesk