[long post, sorry]
OK, how would you feel if we put the ticket on hold for a set period, bearing in mind that a customer comment would release it back to the Support team? If this sounds reasonable, how often would you want an update on this (dependent on the priority of the problem)?
IMO this would solve the issues, as we would not run the risk of the ticket getting closed after 14 days, yet the support guys do not have to get the ticket every hour (as they would all have to 'pass' on that ticket if it had been recently updated and no progress had been made).
We're always up for feedback, and will make changes where they can improve a process.
As I said yesterday, I'm happy to have this discussion, and change the current process surrounding tickets and problems as necessary.
One thing we did discuss internally was raising single user issues on tickets instead of problems. This way you would get a developer working on your issue from a ticket, meaning you would see any updates as they happen. We'd have to set an agreed expectation as to how often a ticket would be updated however. This works quite well with networks tickets, and could be used for development also, what do you guys think?
Sorry, only been here intermittently the last two weeks, but the conversation seems to have gone elsewhere rather than discussing what Mand asked above, and I figured if I didn't post something now this might not get discussed further.
I found some related specifics on the
http://usergroup.plus.net/forum/index.php/topic,5105.0.html thread (albeit that thread was about "policies", which this one isn't, but relevant also to this discussion):
Returning a ticket with an opened problem id is in my eyes wrong. By all means inform the user but the ticket should not be returned, it should be linked to the problem. Then there should be an option to return all the linked tickets with a single action.
Returning a ticket to the user has a 'run on' problem in that it triggers the 14 day closure path. After 14 days the ticket is 'closed' as inactive and links to the internal development issue are lost?
It would certainly be much more 'intuitive' if the ticket wasn't returned while the corresponding problem remains open - in fact it's surely a 'no-brainer'?
As for the visibility, if I have understood correctly: major problems that affect large numbers of users are visible to some extent
here. Tickets that affect only one user are unlikely to get converted to problem, so remain visible on the ticket - it is just where problems that affect a relatively (?) small number aren't visible anywhere and there is nothing to be seen via the ticket system either...
At one point in the ticket, I was told:
"As this is not effecting the majority of our customer base there is unlikely to be a posting on the portal. We will update you once this is resolved.Getting the ticket "returned" when in fact PN is still sorting out the problem, just causes so many issues. I recently "lost" a NetAnnounce ticket (open some time) because of this 14-day factor, forgot to go and update the ticket whilst *still* waiting to hear the outcome of investigations, and bang, ticket gone, just like that.
Said problem about trying to prune the endless spam addresses that get added to the NetAnnounce list here, and finding that when I selected something to delete it, something else got deleted instead. Not insignificant. Acknowledged by F9 as an issue, but last I heard 'still investigating' or some such ... but no outcome to investigations (as far as I know) and now no ticket either.
Would it be possible to have a PUGIT thread about ticket closures/updates and so on (or is there already one?) I'm not looking for a "policy" in the sense that PN should publish one and be accountable for it, simply that some structure of ticket operation be put into practice that avoids the ticket becoming closed by "the system" when the customer is still waiting for an answer.
Regards,
Penny.
