New Rossware Website: rossware.com:
Many months ago, we finally "bit the bullet" and paid the ransom for the domain name "rossware.com" (it had been long held by persons that claim title to a domain name in the hope of making big bucks by selling it to the party that really wants it). In the meantime, our newest resident genius, Alex, was at work building an entirely new Rossware (and terrifically modernized) website.
That new website is now published under the rossware.com domain name (specifically, the url for it is https://rossware.com, but if you merely type "rossware.com in your web browser's address bar, it will take you there).
Pretty soon, we'll re-direct this website url (http://rossware.net) to the new rossware.com.
In the meantime, we are no longer actively making new SD-WorkDiary entries in this old venue. Instead, all new entries are going exclusively to the SD-WorkDiary that's present in the new site.
Please click here to be linked to that new and current SD-WorkDiary.
THIS IS THE LAST ENTRY HERE !!!!!!!!!!!!
Barcode-Scanner Enabled Check-Offs in the PartsPick Form:
This is another item for which we must credit Tony Tyrell in Maryland.
Tony runs a big operation. His people have a ton of mouse-clicking to do, within the PartsPick form, as they click to indicate a particular expected item is being placed in the tote to go outward to a tech, and or as they click to indicate another particular item has appropriately come back from him.
They have so many items that, even though simple mouse clicks are quick and easy, the time consumption overall can still be quite large.
Even worse, because they are going through so many items, errors happen all too frequently. As an example, it's pretty easy to click on a wrong item to indicate -- and perhaps erroneously -- that it's been moved to or from the tech.
Tony wanted a method that would be both faster and more accurate.
Accordingly, if you look in the PartsPick form (shortcut is Shift-Ctrl/F8) when running with this new release, you'll see three new little squares:
If you float your mousepointer over any of the three, you'll see a Tooltip appears, to inform you of the purpose in those little squares.
The purpose, simply, is you may click on any such little square to toggle its list section into barcode-scanner mode. And, when you do, you'll see a bit of visual transformation, as shown here:
The purpose of this transformation is to make it visually obvious that the applicable list section is in "active mode" to receive barcode-scanner input.
Thus, if (with a list section in that mode) you "zap" a part-number-containing barcode, ServiceDesk will instantly look within the list for matching part number. Upon finding a match, it will instantly react just the same as if that item had been mouse-clicked.
Based on this, we think it should now be super fast and accurate to move items to and fro, between your central location and your techs.
. . .
As a BTW, if you're interested in acquiring one or more wireless barcode scanners, we recently acquired this Bluetooth one, and find it quite nice ($50 at full retail, but if you find it on sale it can be cheaper).
New "With-Barcodes" Printing Option:
In the same PartsPick form as above discussed, there has long been an option to print any particular technician's "PartsPick" list. Now, when you choose to print and are presented with the "Select Printer" dialog box, you'll see there is a new option checkbox that, if checked, will cause the printout to include barcodes:
New Filters in JobsPerusal Form:
If you did not know, the keyboard shortcut for this form is Shift-F7. This interface is used when you want to review pending jobs that fit within any of several particular categories (e.g., waiting for parts, needing to be scheduled, etc.). As time goes by, we continue to receive requests from clients for new bases by which to "filter" the particular set of jobs that are shown. Recently, we accepted two new requests.
First, while the JobsPerusal form has long had ability to show only such jobs as are most-recently associated with a particular technician, it has not had ability to show only such jobs as have no association with any tech at all. So, that's the first new filtering option that is now added:
Second, there is now a filter for Wants Sooner:
For context, several years ago we added a colored toggle box to the appointment sections (applicable in both Callsheets and JobRecords) which you can toggle to red to indicate the customer wants the appointment changed to a sooner date, should opportunity arise within your schedule. Here is the toggle box:
Simultaneously, we added a function in the DispatchMap where you can display the locations of each pending appointment (regardless of whether the appointment is for the displayed date) that is toggled for Wants Sooner. By this means, you can look at any particular day where capacity has opened up, and see what Wants-Sooner appointments are convenient to where techs are already driving.
Regardless of that existing capability, a particular user thought it would be nice to be able to also review Wants-Sooner requests from the perspective of the JobsPerusal form, so that capacity is likewise now added.
New "Inventory Import" Feature:
I am not sure why this happens, but from time to time we are contacted by a client who, having decided to finally to begin using ServiceDesk's inventory control system (it's a function that many users initially put off), began in the effort by laboriously entering all of their inventory into an Excel spreadsheet. I don't think this path generally makes sense because, absent certain narrow exceptions, it's far easier to enter inventory directly into ServiceDesk from the get go.
Regardless, if you have basic and reasonably accurate inventory data in an Excel spreadsheet, you naturally hope for a way by which to import it into ServiceDesk's inventory system. Prior to now, there was no mechanism in ServiceDesk by which to do this. It's somewhat of a complicated matter, because everyone ends up arranging inventory data in their spreadsheets differently. So, when contacted by a client wanting to import such data, I have in each instance written custom program code, tailored for the particular data as arranged in the client's spreadsheet. There was also in each instance a fee for this custom work.
Well . . . that's not needed anymore.
I've created a system that allows you to describe how the data is laid out within your Excel spreadsheet and -- on the basis of your description -- ServiceDesk will perfectly import that data for you.
By way of disclaimer, I have not invested so much as would be needed to make this system as beautiful as it could be. In particular, an optimal method for describing the layout of your spreadsheet data would involve an interface where you can point to actual columns from your spreadsheet and tell ServiceDesk (simply by picking from a dropdown in regard to each such column): "Okay, this column contains part numbers; this column contains descriptions; this one indicates what we paid for each part, etc." Instead of investing to make that kind of more optimum interface, I've taken a shortcut via which you provide ServiceDesk with needed details via a back-and-forth dialog (e.g., it asks which column number contains part numbers, and you answer).
Regardless, it works. The method for invoking the dialog (and of course for proceeding with an actual import as the dialog completes) is to use the keyboard shortcut Ctrl-I from within your F10 Inventory Control form (the "I" is for Import).
FYI, the import is designed to add to whatever such Inventory and MasterPlan data as already exists in your system. For such reason, if you want it to replace existing Inventory and/or MasterPlan data, you should delete applicable files first (our support team can of course assist).
Technician-Specific Settings Now Available for Controlling Technician Duties and Rights in SD-Mobile:
A reader may think this entry should be in the SD-Mobile WorkDiary, since it directly pertains to that system. However, ServiceDesk is in fact the place where these new settings capabilities will be managed, so it makes very good sense to describe the new wherewithal here (don't worry; we'll also mention it in the SD-Mobile WorkDiary).
For context, over the years the SD-Mobile system has accumulated a plethora of options whereby a manager may, according to preference, specify a bunch of different elements of interaction that govern what the company's techs can and/or must do within the Mobile environment. These options are all set from within a particular section of the SD-MobileLink program, as shown here:
A particular thing to note about such settings as shown above is that whatever is set by the manager is going to apply to each and every technician in the company. There is no ability, for example, to turn on PVR enforcement for one or more technicians that particularly need it, while leaving that disciplinary feature turned off for technicians that need no such discipline.
Now we have changed that.
In particular, please go into the ServiceDesk Settings form (Ctrl-F1 is the shortcut) and click on any particular technician's name (within the roster of technicians) so as to expose that tech's Properties window. Upon so doing, you'll see there is a new button in the section of the Properties window that pertains to SD-Mobile usage:
Now, please click on the new button as shown above, and you'll see this new interface:
As you can see, the main body in this new interface looks very much like that section as above shown from within SD-MobileLink, and you have the option, in regard to any particular tech, of deferring to such general settings as are there specified, or to set specially and specifically for the selected technician (if you switch to that option, all "borrowed-from-SD-MobileLink" options become enabled so that you can set per specific preference).
If you're wondering, yes, if set with the first option this interface will display with such settings as you have specified in SD-MobileLink. If changing to set specially for a particular tech, it will first show with those same settings, and you can change from there as desired.
Caveats:
-
If your settings in SD-MobileLink are other than original/standard default, the "defer-to-standard" mode in this new interface will not show your particular general settings until and unless you have updated SD-MobileLink to Ver. 2.0.86 or above, and allowed it to cycle at least once (otherwise it will show original/standard defaults).
-
You must likewise have your SD-MobileLink updated to Ver. 2.0.86 or above in order for it to see any such particular-to-tech settings as you have created, and for it to port this information outward to each involved tech's system.
-
For techs using the Windows version of SD-Mobile (aka SDM-w), they must be updated to Ver. 2.1.8 or above (older versions are not coded to get and use the new and specialized information).
-
For techs using the iOS version of SD-Mobile (aka SDM-i), we are still working to upgrade some background processes that will enable their interfaces to get and use the new information (ETA on that is later this week).
Gender Neutrality:
Are all of your technicians male?
If yes, this will not have been a concern for you.
To be sure, right within this WorkDiary, I often use male pronouns when referring to technicians. It's easy that way, and it fits, likely, 99 percent of the time.
But not all of the time.
Fred's Appliance in Ohio happens to employ an excellent female technician. Adam (from Fred's ) pointed out to me how certain language in the appointment confirmation process comes across very poorly for appointments that are scheduled for this female tech, especially where Fred's has configured so that their confirmation-request emails include a picture of the assigned technician, and in this case the picture very obviously shows a woman. Imagine seeing such a picture, with text just below such as:
"We estimate he'll be arriving . . ."
and
"He's scheduled to work on the following . . ."
Imagine the customer clicks on the link to confirm, in the resulting online interface does confirm, and in response receives an automated email that includes:
"We appreciate you confirming your appointment. It allows us to dispatch the technician with increased confidence that when he arrives at your doorstep, there will be a successful connection."
To address this issue, we've added a new field that may be used in configuring this text. The default text has already been configured to use the new field. If you're using customized text, you can update your customized text to use it as well (yes, the customizing-text manual has also been updated to show potential use of the new field).
The new field references, simply, the applicable technician's first name, and allows for a change from such examples as shown above to the following instead:
"We estimate Corina will be arriving . . ."
and
"Corina is expecting to work on the following . . ."
Besides the fact this change avoids the gender pronoun difficulty, I like that it also makes the language more direct and personal.
In regard to the email that's sent by SD-CyberLink after the customer completes confirmation, applicable language there has simply been changed from what's shown above to this instead:
"We appreciate you confirming your appointment. It allow us to dispatch the technician with increased confidence that, when arriving at your doorstep, a successful connection will be made."
This change in the SD-CyberOffice-sent email will require updating to its Ver. 4.5.62 or above.
Update Grid Reference Tool Available in Current-JobRecords Form:
If, in a current-JobRecord form (F7 is the shortuct), you do a Ctrl/Right-Click within a customer's address box, you will now see something new.
Specifically, you will see the StreetList dropdown appear, similar to when you are typing a street name into a Callsheet.
We made this function to make transition easier whenever a user updates to a re-designed map wherein the old grid system is no longer controlling, and, thus, presently in-use references need to be changed so as to match the new system. It might be useful in a few other contexts, as well.
When you pick the applicable street from the dropdown, the system will insert its coordinates. Simultaneously, it will look for any pending appointments, and offer to update such coordinates as attached to them, as well.
EMV-Compatible Credit Card Processing -- In Other Words, You May Now Use "Chip Readers":
Rossware has done the coding and been certified for its Windows-based Virtual Terminal to work via Cayan's Genius Mini.
The "Mini" is a beautiful little cordless device (connects via Bluetooth) which can easily fit in a tech's pocket or be carried on a neck lanyard. Besides allowing card insertion for chip reading, it also allows a traditional swipe. Even better , it allows NFC proximity reading (i.e., reading via card taps, for any card that is so configured).
Also, the device is inexpensive (only $59 per unit).
The one drawback is that Cayan imposes a monthly $9.95 fee on use of the device. That's potentially offset by the fact that, by switching to the Genius system, you may eliminate your annual PCI compliance fee.
Here are instructions for switching into use of this device:
-
Acquire a device for each person/place you want it to be used.
-
Work with Cayan to assure your Cayan gateway profile is on the platform which allows EMV processing (it's a particular "First Data" platform, I believe).
-
Assure each person is operating in a version of SD or SDM that's been updated to use the device (all Window's-system releases from 4/19/18 onward have the capability; SDM-i is likely still a month away).
-
For use in Windows platforms, you'll need to download and install the Genius Application (this application works as an agent that is called to do certain processing by Rossware's Virtual Terminal; if you have not otherwise installed it, the Virtual Terminal will prompt you and provide a link).
-
From within the Virtual Terminal interface, click on the "Device Setup" button, and select as shown here:
With the above done, you should be able to run
perfect transactions using the Mini in any of its modes.
New Option for Sending a StartOfJob Communique When Creating New Jobs:
In June of last year (see item several entries below pertaining to Rel. 4.8.29) we enabled User-defined Email- and SMS-Templates (in a nutshell, you can create and contextually deploy your own "form-letter" setups for emailing or SMS-messaging your customers).
Recently, Matt Parker suggested a context where you might want to use a special-purpose such template. That purpose is where you have first scheduled a new job with a customer. Perhaps you want to send an email thanking the customer, advising of general policies and what to expect, etc.
It seemed like a great idea.
To make it effective, we obviously needed something more than to simply rely on a CSR to volitionally think of sending such a missive in each instance. We needing for the sending to be more automated, and definite.
Matt's idea was to optionally incorporate this sending event right into SD's Job/Sale transition. So, that's what we've done, via a new option as seen here:
As you can see, we are calling our new and special kind of missive the "StartOfJob Communique." The option to pick its use is (or, at least, we think it should be) self-evident.
Regardless, I'll explain.
Assuming you leave that new box checked, ServiceDesk will automatically send (in conjunction with job-creation) the particular User-defined Template that you have designated for this purpose.
Please note this new option will automatically activate and insert a checkmark if in a suitable situation (e.g., the Callsheet that you're transitioning from is setup for COD work and includes a consumer email address, plus you have setup your system overall with a suitable template for the COD situation). Thus, the default for any applicable situation is "on," and it's only by deliberate user action (un-checking that box) that sending will not be inclusive to the Job/Sale transition.
In regard to designation of a template for this purpose, it's done by the title you give to the underlying file that contains the template, and you can in fact designate two different templates: one for COD jobs and one for third-party-payer jobs (presumably, suitable language is different for those different situations). Complete instructions have been added as the last page in our User-Defined-Templates Handbook.
Assistance for Assigning Technician in Multiple-Zone Situations:
If you have a larger operation and it covers a significantly large territory, odds are good that you use the ZoneScheduler system to divide your area into separate zones, and that you have particular techs working within particular zones.
If the above is true, you'll be interested in this new feature.
In a nutshell, you may now indicate which techs you wish to have associated with which zones, and the system will use that information to limit the list of suggested technicians for assignment to an appointment during the Job/Sale transition from a Callsheet.
To use this new system, you need to create a very simple file. It's probably easiest if you use Excel or similar to create the file. The file needs to have one line item for each of your zones, and just two columns in each line. In the first column you should place the zone number that is applicable to that line. In the second column, you should simply list the two-character abbreviation for each tech that you wish to have associated with that zone (and with each separated by a comma). Thus, it might look something like this:
Please note there is no reason why any particular tech cannot be associated with more than one zone (depending on your situation, this may indeed in many cases be very apt).
This file must be saved in .CSV format (that extension specifies a structure that is comma-delimited), saved with the precise filename WhchTechToWhchZone.CSV, and placed into the same sd\Netdata folder that contains your other primary ServiceDesk data.
What happens is, when you engage in the Job/Sale transition from a Callsheet, the system looks for presence (or not) of the above-described file. If it's there, and if there is a zone assigned to the new job, the system looks in that file for a line that has the applicable zone indicator in its first column. Upon finding such a line, it looks in the second column for an indication of associated technicians. Upon finding those (and verifying that each is a currently valid tecnician), it places each in the dropdown from which you may select, for assignment to the new appointment.
In other words, instead of seeing the full list of technicians, like this:
You'll see a list that's limited to just the zone-associated technicians, like this:
Please note we've configured so there is a different background color in this dropdown list, depending on if it has been populated on a limited-to-zone-associated-techs basis, or if it's a more traditional showing of your entire roster of techs (rose-colored for the new/optional mode, blue-colored for traditional).
Please note further if you float your mousepointer over the dropdown listing in either mode, the system will display a ToolTip that describes the mode and suggests how you may toggle to the opposite mode, if desired . . . as seen for one mode here:
Assuming that this is something you want, please don't be intimidated by the need to setup the underlying file. It's really super easy, and our support staff will be delighted to assist, if you wish.
Designation of "Pseudo" Appointment Via the Job/Sale Transition:
To remind, in ServiceDesk we have real appointments, pseudo appointments and fake appointments. The meaning of a real appointment is obvious. A pseudo appointment is for a real customer and is attached to a real JobRecord, but the tech is not expected to actually go to the customer's home (instead, he's expected to do some element of follow-through on the job, during the allotted appointment time). A fake appointment, on the other hand, is not in any manner attached to a customer or JobRecord. It might be for something, as an example, like "Get an oil change."
Until now, designation of an appointment into pseudo status was done from the F6 ScheduleList form, by there unchecking the little checkbox that otherwise is by default checked to indicate the appointment is real. A particular client wanted ability to make that designation when an appointment is created simultaneous with Job/Sale transition from a Callsheet, so that now exists, as seen here:
Absent this new option (if for whatever reason you wanted that initial appointment to be classified as pseudo), you would have had to go into the F6 form after the Job/Sale transition, to there uncheck the checkbox. Now you don't have to do that.
You Control Quantity of Days for Warning re Recent Prior Work on Same Machine:
If you check the last entry in the posting just below (i.e., the posting that concerns release of Ver. 4.8.51), you'll see where we describe a new feature, where a user will be warned, when doing a Job/Sale transition, if there was a prior job completed on the same machine Type and at the same address, less than 60 days prior.
Of course, that 60-day warning period did not suit everyone.
So, we've made it so you can set the warning period to preference (it will still default at 60 days).
To do so, bring up your Callsheet "Cheat-Sheet" (just right click on any otherwise non-operable place on the face of a Callsheet). Look for the following in the resulting Cheat-Sheet display, and click on it:
When you click on that item, you'll be presented with a dialog that allows you to set the warning period to a quantity of days other than 60.
For Improved Speed and Performance, Automated Segmentation of Files as Contained in the HLinks Folder:
If you did not know, any drag-and-drop hyperlinks that you create are stored in your \sd\HLinks folder. A few other kinds of hyperlinked files may be stored there as well. Over time, you may accumulate a large quantity of files there. This may be a problem because Windows is sometimes extremely slow when accessing contents within a folder that contains too many files. In consequence, if you're wanting to open a hyperlink in ServiceDesk (or create a new one), you may find there is an atrocious delay.
Obviously, delay is bad!
The simple solution is to distribute any such large quantity of files, as may presently exist at the root level of your \sd\HLinks folder, into a set of subfolders, with each containing a more manageable quantity of files. Believe it or not, this fully solves the issue. However, you may not think to do it, you may not know how to do it, and you may not want to be involved in such work.
We have a solution.
Now, ServiceDesk watches to see how long it takes when Windows is asked to access contents within your HLinks folder. If it detects Windows taking more than a second, it will inform you that is too long, and will offer to run a routine that will automatically go through all those files in your HLinks folder, parceling each into a subfolder that corresponds with the month in which it was created.
Thus, instead of having, say, 60,000-plus files in the root-level of \sd\HLinks, you'll end up with a bunch of subfolders, each containing a much smaller quantity of files. This enables Windows to do the needed file access, without being slow.
You may also, if you wish, access this new function directly, as shown here:
Catch the TimeCard Scoundrel:
I received a call from a particular client. He has a CSR who is terrific in almost every way, except this person routinely arrives late (often, many minutes late). Curiously, this person's ServiceDesk TimeCard nevertheless shows her as, supposedly, always arriving on time.
How can this be?
Our client's suspicion is that this otherwise terrific CSR is just crafty enough to reset her computer's system clock (to falsely indicate correctly-expected arrival time) before "punching in," then she resets it back to the correct time afterwards.
Aside from admiring the cleverness (while perhaps also despairing over the fiendishness), how do you catch that?
In answer, we have created an added element of behind-the-scenes management, as a person uses ServiceDesk to punch in or out. Essentially, the system simultaneously does a little query via the internet, asking an external time source what is the true and honest time. If the true and honest time is more than three minutes different from the time on the computer's system clock, ServiceDesk writes to a secret file, providing details on the event.
We are not going to indicate here what is the name or location of that secret file. After all, if an employee that wants to engage in this practice knew where to find the file, he or she might open and edit it to hide the evidence. Assuming that, as an owner or top-level manager, you wish to make use of this file, please contact our support team (email support@rossware.net, call or open a support connection), identify yourself as a person in an authorized role, and we'll provide instructions on how to locate the file. We do not want to provide such information to mere employees.
Automated Alert
If Having Worked on Same Machine Within 60 Days:
The concern is as follows:
You've received a request to perform service on a machine. The person who is doing the Job/Sale transition fails to realize that prior work was done less than 60 days ago. If that fact was realized, there are certain things that would have been done differently, in setting up the job. Because it was not realized, those things are not done differently.
Now, ServiceDesk watches for you.
When the Job/Sale button is activated from a Callsheet, ServiceDesk looks to see if there was a same-address and same-Type-Description job, completed less than 60 day prior. If so, there will be a little popup like this:
Response by the user is obvious.
Zone Identifier Now
In PartsLabels as Applicable to S/O Parts:
Speaks for itself, I think.
Auto-Dialing and Caller-ID, Turn-Key Integration with Service Company Solutions Telephony Systems:
Service Company Solutions (SCS) is the same company that brings you "The Blue Book." Over the years, this company has developed many superb supplemental systems that are targeted, primarily, toward assisting appliance repair companies. A relative newcomer, in their array of services, is provisioning and support of complete and robust telephone systems.
This is good because, obviously, Rossware clients need good telephone systems.
More fully, Rossware clients would like to have telephone systems wherein it is very easy to do direct integration.
One purpose of such integration is auto-dialing. Put simply, you see a telephone number in ServiceDesk and want to dial it. Just click, and the dialing is done for you. It's beautiful.
Another purpose is Caller-ID.
The phone rings.
Maybe you'd like to know real stuff about the caller before picking up the line (e.g., the circumstance of any job or jobs that may be pending for that person, any history of past jobs, etc.). Maybe you'd like to simply use the Caller-ID number and name as basis to easily and accurately insert into a Callsheet.
Integration with Caller-ID makes all the above into reality.
As the phone rings (and if in ServiceDesk it is the first vacant Callsheet that is selected or turned to), ServiceDesk will place the caller's telephone number into a little window next to the Callsheet's first telephone number box. All you must do is click on that little window, and the number inserts for you. Besides the fact this accurately places the number into the box, it simultaneously triggers a search in your ServiceDesk Customer Database on that telephone number. Thus, you'll instantly see references to all such present and past jobs as had any involvement with that telephone number.
Similarly, ServiceDesk will place the caller's name into a little window next to the Callsheet's CustomerName box. All you must do is click in that window, and, again, ServiceDesk will insert the contents into the Callsheet's adjoining box. This likewise triggers a relevant search in the Customer Database -- though in this case showing results based on the name, as opposed to on the telephone number.
Imagine picking up the phone and saying:
"Hello Mrs. Johnson. I bet you're calling about your washing machine repair. I see, in fact, we just get parts in for it, and we were about to call you."
Or, at the very least, being more prepared, than otherwise, to provide relevant and excellent assistance. Your customers will be very impressed.
Such functionality has been offered in ServiceDesk for a very long time. However (and sadly, we feel), most users have failed to take advantage. A large reason for this is that not all telephone systems can participate in such communication as is needed to make these integrations work. Even for those systems that in theory can so communicate, morevoer, it is sometimes precipitously challenging to complete the needed setup.
That's why this new cooperation is so great!
Working together, Rossware and SCS have configured elements on both sides so that, if you are a SCS telephone-system client, it becomes virtually a "piece of cake" to have full, perfect and robust auto-dialing and Caller-ID functionality within ServiceDesk.
It's a super-powerful thing, and now you can have it easily, along with getting into a wonderful telephone system to boot.
To learn more, your first step will be to explore with SCS what are the particular telephone system solutions they offer. Here is a link.
New Intelligence When Confirming Multiple Appointments that are Each Connected to the Same Customer, Appointment Date/Time and Assigned Tech:
We thank Tim Koyonen for pointing out the need for this improvement. He explained how it's pretty common for customers to request simultaneous repairs on more than one machine. Because the Mobile system is designed to connect to a single machine per JobRecord and appointment, the office will place each of a particular customer's machine requests into its own JobRecord, and make individual appointments as connected to each (all appointments targeted for the same date and time frame, but nevertheless each as its own individual record).
The issue that arises in this circumstance is, when requesting that the system send out appointment-reminder/confirmation-requests, it sends one request for each unique appointment and machine-to-be-serviced. Beyond the fact that your customer may be annoyed by these multiple requests, they may also be confused when they see the first request referencing one particular machine to be serviced, when knowing they requested work on that machine, and one or more others, too.
We've solved that.
With a combination of this ServiceDesk release and the current release of SD-CyberLink (Ver. 4.5.48), the system will be considerably smarter in handling this kind of situation. In particular, where you have multiple appointments, each connected to a different JobRecord, but each for the same customer, assigned to the same tech and for the same date and time frame -- where all that is true -- the system will note the fact and create a single reminder/confirmation-request to cover the entire set.
In fact, in each context where the reminder/confirmation process is poised to remind the customer of what kind of machine is being serviced, the system will intelligently create a combined description. Suppose, for example, there are appointments to service a Whirlpool Washer, a Maytag Range and a Kitchenaid Dishwasher. Formerly, there would have been individual descriptions for each (and each in its own particular reminder/request). Now, the single combined request will reference such objects of service in this manner:
"Washer, Range and Dishwasher"
Obviously, that's much more enlightening (and less confusing) to your customer.
Another benefit of this new intelligence is, when your customer confirms or cancels on the single combined request, the result flows back into each involved appointment and each involved JobRecord.
Please don't forget. You also have to update SD-CyberLink so as to enable this new intelligence.
New "Restore Defaults" Function in the Security Form:
The ServiceDesk Security form (Shift/F11) is, of course, where you indicate which actions are going to be password protected, which are not, whose passwords will unlock which door, and so on.
One challenge in regard to using this system is that, often, because new users don't have a good understanding of what's what, they end up somewhat foolishly putting locks on doors that don't really need them, and removing locks on doors that really should have them. We've structured the defaults (which doors initially have locks versus not) in a manner we think is optimum for most users. Where a user has, well, created something of a "which doors are locked and which are not" mess, it's possible they'll realize they just want to return to defaults, then adjust to particular preference (more carefully this time) from there.
Until now, we did not have a function for this. Now we do. When in the Security form you display Actions (this is the mode in which you see each door that may potentially possess a lock or not, and set each according to preference), a new little button appears, as shown here:
If you click on it, you'll get a dialog that asks if you truly wish to restore defaults. If you respond "Yes," that is of course exactly what happens.
Warning, in the Security Form, Against Locking Whole Buildings, While Simultaneously and Also Locking Doors Within:
At Rossware, we very much want for all our users to enjoy maximum ease, delight and smoothness-of-flow as they use our systems. Given this, we find ourselves feeling greatly frustrated when, as we're assisting on some issue, we see that a client must endure not just one, but two password challenges before they are permitted to display a particular report.
Why does that happen?
In a nutshell, we've structured the Security system to give you a lot of flexibility. In regard to the various reports that are available from within the Reports form, as an example, it's possible you don't want your employees, generally, to be able to access anything from within that area of functionality. If so, you can put a lock on access to the entire form (a lock that may be opened with authorized passwords, of course, but a lock nonetheless). Contrariwise, it's possible you don't mind if employees have access in this area generally, but there are one or two particular reports you consider sensitive, and do not want just anyone having access to. If so, you may forego having a lock on the context overall, while nevertheless putting locks on the particular individual reports that concern you.
So, we give you that flexibility, and . . . what happens in consequence?
Yes, many of you choose to put a lock on the entire context, and on individual reports within the context as well. Thus, there you are, having to endure one password challenge just to get into the context, then another to run a particular report within it.
Because we don't want you to be endlessly enduring this kind of unneeded and senseless frustration, there are now mechanisms to help keep you away (as you configure your Security settings) from making such a mistake.
In particular, where you choose to activate password protection in a whole-context area that also has potential password protections within (there are, incidentally, other such contexts, besides the Reports form), the system will look to see if you have activated password protection on one or more of the sub-areas. If so, it will suggest you should not have both layers, and will offer to delete one or the other. Conversely, where you are activating password protection on any potentially applicable sub-area, the system will look to see if whole-context password protection is activated in a manner that already covers that item. If so, it will again present a warning and similar options.
A Couple of New Password-Protection Options:
First, you may now password protect against editing a formerly-saved purchase invoice number in the PartsProcess (F8) form. Evidently, some users were finding that some of their employees sometimes inadvertently changed that number. This password protection defaults as turned on.
Second, you may now differentially distinguish, in password protection, between zone-overbooking that results from changing an existing appointment, as opposed to creating a completely new appointment. Formerly, a single password protection applied to either situation, but we found some people wanted a password challenge to exist for the new appointment situation, while not for a mere change. This addition allows you to so distinguish. It also defaults as turned on.
New "Systems-Sentry" Feature:
Many people have asked for this.
You've learned to rely on one or more automated systems. Maybe it's SD-MobileLink, which (assuming you are using the Mobile system) must be running to keep your techs updated with live information regarding work they are supposed to do. Maybe it's SD-CyberLink, which (assuming you are using SD-CyberOffice functions) must be running to provide live service to your customers who are seeking to book jobs online. Maybe it's SB-DispatchLink, which (assuming you wish to have live integration with ServiceBench) must be running to keep ServiceBench informed of your availability for scheduling, informed of the status of each job they have prior dispatched to you, and to download new dispatches they create for you.
It might be one or more of these utilities, or, potentially, any of several others. The point is, these systems need to be kept running, for, if they are not, needed communication processes will not be occurring in real time, as they need to occur.
In some instances a user at a station where such a utility is running may inadvertently close it. In others, the computer itself might shutdown. In still others, the utility might have encountered an issue that internally prevents it from continuing in performance of its work.
Regardless of cause, when any such utility is not doing its work, it's possible you, your employees and/or your customers might suffer frustration, prior to realizing and addressing the cause.
That's what this new system is designed to address.
In particular, it allows you to specify the systems that you are depending on and want to have watched. Based on that specification, it watches for you, and will proactively inform you if/when it detects that any such utility is not actively performing its work.
The heart of this new system is a new interface in ServiceDesk that we call the "Systems-Sentry" form. To access it, click on File Functions in the ServiceDesk Main Menu, as shown here, then on a new menu item:
This (or at least something rather similar) is what you will then see:
As you can see, the interface lists each of the automated-functions and/or separate utilities you might want to have monitored (an item will show in red if its box is checked and if the amount of time since its last cycle is excessive). You may simply check the box next to each/any item that you wish to have actively monitored. In the section immediately below the selection area, you may further indicate the method (or methods) that you wish for the system to use when alerting you.
If you choose to be alerted via a message dialog box within ServiceDesk itself, you'll see a message that looks similar to this:
If you choose to be alerted via an email, you'll receive an email that looks similar to this:
If you choose to be alerted via a text message, you'll receive a text that looks similar to this:
To be more precise, you'll receive such an alert if/when any item that's been activated for monitoring fails to show ongoing timely work. In particular, it will happen when a subject utility does not show active work for one hour or more, or when an activated and automated system in ServiceDesk (such as, for example, the Auto-Archive system) does not show active work for 24 hours or more.
Direct and auto-linked search into ARsRetired data:
Accounts Receivable records (aka A/Rs) records are not kept (at least they are not kept as such) after they are paid in full. The purpose of any such item is to show you have an outstanding expectation for payment. Thus, once such an item is satisfied, there is no longer any direct need for it. Regardless, it's nice to have a log that maintains information regarding such records as did exist, prior to their demise.
That is the purpose that has until now been behind-the-scenes served via an otherwise obscure file called ARsRetired.txt. The thing is, there has been no direct-provided access to the data in this file. When and if you encountered the odd-situation need for its information, you'd need to independently locate and open it, when search within its data for the item of your interest.
Now we've re-structured that file (it's now called ARsRetired.csv), and made its contents directly available from within ServiceDesk. In particular, in any action where you've requested to see any such A/R records as are connected with a particular job, the system will offer to further look into this data store. Thus (and as an example), you could receive information that an A/R record for Inv # 12345 was retired as fully paid on XYZ date, and with inclusion of such notes as existed in the record prior to its retirement, its total amount, etc.
Miscellaneous Improvements:
-
In the A/Rs Review form (F3), added ability to search on basis of A/R amount.
-
When you're composing an SMS text message in the SD-Mail interface, the system will now warn if you're approaching or exceeding the 160-character maximum.
-
Made it so pseudo-appointments now default to a JobCount value of zero (formerly they defaulted to a JobCount of 1, just as with standard appointments).
-
Made it so the Notes sections in the Rolodex (in particular, as applicable to Companies and Persons) will not automatically save user edits (the need arose because sometimes people were inadvertently making changes). Rather, the system will resist saving with any such change absent user confirmation that saving is wanted.
-
Made it so you won't be pestered about overbooking a zone pocket when editing an existing appointment, if that edit does not move the appointment to a different scheduling pocket, and if the pocket that it's in was already overburdened (formerly, any change in the timeframe would result in potentially being pestered).
-
Corrected the unintended (and formerly not known) fact that appointments as present in Hibernated Callsheets were not being counted against availability. Thanks to Paul Manning at Sharper Electronics for bringing this matter to our attention.
Powerful Hyperlinking Ability Now in SD-Mails:
This one is especially important for triage.
Slightly less than a month ago (scroll downward to see the third of "Four Very Big Items" in the 10/26/17 entry below) we announced our addition of a new online triage center. Part of the concept in this new interface is it's a piece of cake for anyone anywhere, when given appropriate credentials, to provide triaging service for you. Then of course the question arises, after someone has done needed triaging via that interface, how does the triaging information (that they've produced) get back into the office.
Very simply, it's done via SD-Mails. You designate who it is, within the office, that you want to have processing parts requests that the triage person has indicated are wanted. Triage information is conveyed to that person via SD-Mails that appropriately list each such part, along with any such added notes as may have been provided.
The new trick we've added is for the purpose of facilitating this office person's work.
Imagine he or she is looking at a SD-Mail that says so-and-so, as a triage person, has requested, say, these three parts should be ordered to go out with the tech on a particular appointment. Each part is shown as a line-item in the SD-Mail. You can imagine it's a bit of work if this office person must look within the SD-Mail, notice what is the JobRecord number involved, hit F7 to bring up the JobRecord form, hit "i" to begin an invoice number search, type in the number, then hit Enter to search -- then, once the correct JobRecord is shown, click on its "Order Parts" button. Of course, work is still not done because, absent automation otherwise, this operator still has to type appropriate information into the PartsRequest form.
What's the solution?
We've made it so this operator may simply double-click on a part-request line-item as present in one of these triage-request SD-Mails, and the system will instantly link to and open the JobRecord involved. It will likewise click on that JobRecord's "Order Parts" button and fully fill-in the PartsRequest form which then displays. Thus, a single double-click sets up the entire thing.
You may wonder why we have not made the system simply create the PartsProcess request directly, without an office person needing to be involved at all. It's possible we'll indeed do that in the future. However, for now our thinking is that you may want to keep an office person in the loop, thereby withholding from outside triage persons such absolute power as would be involved if their actions were permitted to directly create orders within your PartsProcess system.
Aside from this double-click to create internal part request in the triage situation hyperlink, we've created a couple of other hyperlink opportunities there. These can especially be useful if via ServiceDesk you've sent out an SMS text message and received back a reply. That reply will always indicate the smartphone number the reply came from. If applicable, it will also indicate the JobRecord number that the communication concerns.
As you look at your customer's reply, odds are high that you're going to want to locate any such JobRecord as is relevant. That's where this added hyperlinking ability comes into play.
Just double-click
on the indication of JobRecord number, if present, and ServiceDesk will
instantly display that JobRecord for you. If there is no such
indication, double-click instead on the indication of
smartphone number the reply was sent from. This will cause
ServiceDesk to open the JobRecords form and self-initiate a search on
the telephone number in question. Thus, via that means it will
instantly open the JobRecord of interest.
Improved Analytics for Insight Into Which Parts Are Sensible for Pre-Ordering in Triage, and Which Ones Are Not:
Tony Lott takes the credit for this one.
He called to describe the huge burden his operation endures in special-ordering parts for triage purposes, with a high percent ending up as having missed the mark, and then having to be returned to the vendor.
Tony wondered if there might be a way to identify parts that have a particularly high "miss" rate in triage. If so identified, there could be a warning -- when in triage a person is about to order such a part -- to say "Hey, maybe you shouldn't . . . this part has succeeded when ordered in triage only 5 percent of the time" (or something like that).
To fulfill this need, we've added two columns to the export that is available in conjunction with running a Usage Analysis report (shortcut sequence to get there is Ctrl-F8-->U, indicate your date range, let the report run and display to your screen, then click on the "Send this Report to Excel" button).
The two new columns are on the extreme right of the export. One indicates the quantity of each item that was ordered but not used. The other indicates the percent of items actually used, as compared to total quantity ordered overall.
The general thinking is that, when loaded into Excel, you sort on that last column. Thus, at the bottom of the sorted stack you'll see items that have scored very well, in terms of hitting the target of need. At the top of the sorted stack, you'll see those that have scored badly.
Given such visibility into items that have scored badly, you can use your judgment in deciding which items you want to add into your PartsHotList, and with appropriate notes accompanying.
If you are not familiar with use of the PartsHotList, it's simply a file you maintain with part numbers that, if someone is about to order such a part, they are alerted with whatever note it is that you want them to see. Facility for this was added 9/25/06 with release of Ver. 4.2.23 (search here on that "4.3.23" string and you'll instantly find the entry that announces the feature, and includes instructions on how to use it).
We hope, via use of this mechanism, you will
have enhanced visibility by which to intelligently curtail triage
pre-orders that are unlikely to succeed.
New Filter Option in JobsPerusal Interface:
There has long been an option in this interface (Shift/F7) to show only ShopJobs. Now there is an option to show only non-ShopJobs:
It's that simple.
Text Replies Now Go Where Text Replies Should Go:
It's been a couple of years since we first introduced SMS-based text-messaging as an alternate form of communication between you and your customers. Naturally, we keep expanding the options for its use and effectiveness. Regardless, there is one element of limitation that has until now persisted on the ServiceDesk side of SMS use. It is that, if your SMS recipient chooses to reply, we have had no mechanism by which to assure the reply goes specifically back to the office person who sent out the initiating text (instead, it's gone as an SD-Mail to the person that is designated within SD-CyberLink as general recipient for SD-Mails).
By way of comparison, this limitation has not existed in SD-Mobile. In particular, if the tech uses SMS as the method for a "call-ahead," and if the recipient replies, that reply has appropriately gone right back (as, obviously, it should) to the sending tech.
Now, the same "how-it-really-should-be" functionality works in ServiceDesk as well. It will be the actual sender who receives, as an SD-Mail, any text-reply from a SMS-text recipient. This should enable practices within ServiceDesk that are much closer to real-time, person-to-person texting (only with the office-side person working from within ServiceDesk, of course, as opposed to from a smartphone).
It's important to know, BTW, success in this
improvement depends on updating both ServiceDesk (to this version or
above) and SD-CyberLink (to Ver. 4.5.55 or above).
Improved Function and Definition for Initiating Auto-Dialing, SMS-Texting, Plain-Emails and/or User-Defined-Template-Based Emails and Texts:
While working on the above, we discovered that, as various features have over time been added in regard to what can be done via a telephone number and/or email address as present in a ServiceDesk Callsheet or JobRecord, we'd somewhat "mucked up" the set of keyboard and mouse actions that are available, and their results. In other words, there was not very good across-the-board consistency, agreement and uniformity. We decided a wholesale alignment of functionality was needed, and have now accomplished that.
In fact, we have created a new section in the Callsheet "Cheat-Sheet" to specifically describe each such potential action (in particular, as presently aligned for perfect and reliable consistency in every applicable context). If you do not recall what a Cheat-Sheet is, it's a listing of otherwise-hidden actions that you can do in a particular operating context. In each applicable context, you may display its Cheat-Sheet by doing a simple right-click on any point of the applicable form that is not otherwise functional.
Thus, if you right-click in any portion of a Callsheet that is not otherwise functional, you'll see the Cheat-Sheet that's applicable to Callsheets. In particular, you'll see it now includes a new section that looks like this:
Please note the second item among those above-highlighted -- in particular, the action to initiate a SMS text-message via a clicked-upon telephone number. Though that function is not new with this release, the present method is now different, as compared to what was prior specified. The reason is because, on doing this re-alignment, we discovered we'd inadvertently commandeered the same method (Ctrl/Rt-Click) -- as had formerly been specified for this action -- for the newer "Send template-based email or SMS" function (which you'll see as the item just below it, above). Obviously, you can't have the same method triggering different functions, so we had to move one of the functions to a new method. Thus, the "Send-SMS" function has been moved from Ctrl/Rt-Click to Shift/Rt-Click.
Please also note there is now clear differentiation between such action as is needed to initiate an email to each of multiple email addresses (as might be present in an email box), versus targeting a single email address. The general notion is you should be able to instantly and effortlessly (even intuitively, once you are in habit of using these methods) initiate any of these communicative methods via any particular telephone number or email address target, as already present in either a Callsheet or JobRecord.
Yes, the same actions will work precisely the
same from either a current or archived JobRecord. Regardless, the
above-shown Cheat-Sheet reminders are found exclusively in the Callsheet
Cheat-Sheet (in fact, the two JobRecord forms do not have their own
Cheat-Sheet).
Dedicated Handbook to Guide Customization of Automated and Semi-Automated Communication Scripts:
As
contrasted from the above methods (which involve initiating otherwise
non-automated communications), Rossware systems offer a great variety of
communications that are either fully or semi-automated. These may
be initiated by ServiceDesk itself, SD-CyberOffice or SD-Mobile, and may
proceed from either your office or, in the case of Tech "Call-Aheads,"
from technicians' mobile platforms. Likewise, they may (depending
on circumstances) be via email, RoboCall or text-messaging.
Just recently, we added facility by which you may customize the "Call-Ahead" scripts that are used from within SD-Mobile. Naturally, we needed to provide instruction on how to do this new customization. Until now, virtually all our script-customization instructions had resided in the SD-CyberOffice Handbook. Initially this had made perfect sense, since it was initially SD-CyberOffice functions where such customization options were added. Regardless, as we'd later added some customization options for some emails that are sent by SD-MobileLink, we'd tucked those instructions into there as well (not a perfect fit, but it kept related-subject-matter instructions together). With need now to add even more instructions that are not related to SD-CyberOffice, we decided all our script-customization instructions needed their own dedicated home.
Accordingly, such instructions as were formerly in the SD-CyberOffice handbook have all been removed, combined with the needed new instructions, with all now established as its own handbook on the dedicated topic of customizing scripts. At appropriate points, both the SD-CyberOffice Handbook and SD-Mobile Handbook now have hyperlinks to this separate document. Here is your hyperlink, likewise, by which you can access from here.
Fix for Old Telephone Numbers in Non-Standard Format:
As an otherwise un-announced improvement, we recently made it so that, post-editing, Callsheet and JobRecord telephone number boxes positively enforce standard telephone-number format (e.g., either XXX-XXXX or XXX-XXX-XXXX). Thus, if the text that you've placed into such a box was not in such standard format, but can be appropriately re-formatted, upon completion of any edit it will be. For some users, this has created an issue. It's because until now, they've been using a different-than-standard format (e.g., XXX.XXX.XXXX or XXX XXX XXXX). The reason it's an issue is because, with the system now enforcing the standard format, they end up with a portion of their data in standard and a portion not.
Another matter that sometimes arises is, back in the day, some service companies would not bother with inclusion of the area code where the applicable code was the same as their own. However, as telephone numbers have proliferated, it has become increasingly intolerable to assume any particular area code, so all-cases inclusion of the area code is now much more typically the practice. But, what do you do about all the older items in you data, in which the area code was omitted?
This new feature is designed to address both issues. The path to its access is deliberately obscure (it's not something you'll likely need to access more than once). Basically, from the archived JobRecord interface, press Shift/Ctrl/Alt/Right-Click. Then, just follow the dialog. It's self-explanatory from there.
BTW, the fact of having different formatting in telephone numbers now, as compared to older items in the data, is primarily cosmetic. A particular client thought it was much worse than that. In particular, they'd been using the dot-separator versus hyphen-separator format. So now they thought, with some telephone numbers in one format and some in the other, the only path by which to exhaustively do an as-you-type database search was to type once in the dot-separator format and again in the hyphen-separator format.
That is not actually true.
In fact, when typing in a telephone number in
any of the as-you-type database search contexts, it's best to type the
number with no separating characters at all. When you do this, the
system finds any and all telephone number matches, regardless of format
they are in.
Dramatically Enhanced Performance in Many Operations:
As databases grow larger, methods that once worked well sometimes no longer do. In particular regard to archived-PartsProcess records, some of our larger and very-long-term clients have accumulated hundreds of thousands of records. In a number of ServiceDesk functions, these very large files were resulting in unacceptable compromise. In particular, operations were either taking much too long or were searching less deeply into applicable history than would otherwise be optimum.
The problem is now solved.
To give you some idea of how bad was the issue and how effective is the solution, a particular client reported that one report was taking nine hours to complete!
Yes, that's very terrible.
With the new solution deployed, that same report now completes in seven minutes. (Yes, seven minutes is still a long time; however, it's an extraordinarily comprehensive report, and running it is not part of any ordinary daily operation.)
Even more happily, you'll find many ordinary and routine operations (indeed, the majority of any such operations that might have formerly consumed a second or two or three) are now dramatically faster. This is particularly and absolutely true for any operation that was slow because you have a large quantity of archived-PartsProcess records. All such operations will now search not only quickly, but also exhaustively (i.e., within the entire database).
SB-DispatchLink
Now Explicitly Accommodates Multiple Instances:
It's a funny industry. For some time, AIG and Assurant have both been sending dispatches via ServicePower. More recently, both began sending some of their dispatches via ServiceBench as well. It makes for a somewhat messy situation
Regardless, we have you covered.
As one needed element to address, there are now QET designations covering both of these entities in each brand of clothing (i.e., as connected to a ServicePower dispatch, and as connected to a ServiceBench dispatch).
As another complication, we needed to deal with the fact some servicers are now finding themselves in a situation where one or more third-party-administrator clients cannot be managed under a single ServiceBench account (thus, you end up needing to have more than one ServiceBench account). Since each instance of SB-DispatchLink has a single account designation, the only way to effectively accommodate this is by running a different instance for each such account. This could be troublesome if you wanted each such instance to run from the same desktop, because each would save (and read) its settings from the same location.
We've now solved this issue. Instruction on how to use the solution is provided here. (There is also a new button in the SB-DispatchLink utility itself, that will open the instruction for you. Plan to use it in the future, as a more convenient place to get the instruction, as compared to coming back to here.)
The same solution works, BTW, in the EmailedDispatchReciever utility (another place where we found users needing to run with multiple simultaneous instances).
Four Very Big
Items:
These items are being described in detail in an email blast that will go out shortly. For completeness here, we'll just briefly mention them.
-
We again have a super competent in-house iOS developer, so development of Apple-side products (in particular and especially the iPad version of SD-Mobile) will again be proceeding at a good pace.
-
New and awesome method to drive a large quantity of very positive online reviews (e.g., Yelp, Google Reviews, etc.) regarding your company (read beginning at Page 14 in the CyberOffice handbook for details).
-
Browser-based triaging center. It's done via a new website: triage.rossware.net. It should automatically work superbly for you, so long as you are using SD-Mobile.
-
This one is the biggest! You can now be a referrer via which your COD customers may potentially subscribe to Warrantech month-to-month service contracts. You get a portion of every month's payment premium, and many other benefits. Click here to learn more.
Miscellaneous
Fixes and Improvements:
At the NASC convention classes in Virginia, as always happens, we catalogued several requests for tweaks, additions and fixes (and thank you again Michael Basich for again keeping notes and compiling a list for me). Among other completions done from that list (several others are in SD-Mobile):
A fault in the new Inventory Deployments report is fixed.
Difficulty in deleting telephone numbers from the Rolodex is fixed.
System now informs of no match when linking to A/Rs from a JobRecord.
Improved tooltips in a number of places.
Made internal coding for G.E. claims (as made to ServicePower) automatically insert the needed Repair Code (i.e., as applicable whether it's a sealed-system versus normal repair).
Beyond this work, also responded to numerous email-forwarded error messages, to address any such weaknesses as allowed errors to arise. When working with one particular such item, discovered and fixed a systemic weakness in regard to how the system was managing multiple simultaneous instances of the F10 Inventory Control form.
New Instruction
Document on Setting Up for the Auto-Dialer:
Auto-dialing is a wonderful feature. Virtually any place that you see at telephone number in ServiceDesk, right-click or double-click and -- bada-bing, bada-boom -- ServiceDesk connects to your phone system and dials for you.
Most people are not using this wonderful feature. The main impediment has been in knowing how to set it up. So, we made an instruction document (click here).
As you'll by reading this short document, setup positively should be very simple. Check it out.
New Filtering Option in JobsPerusal Form:
ServiceDesk has a dandy built-in system to watch your back in regard to an expectation that a part may arrive on a date that's too late to be used on an appointment for which it is needed. In particular, as a parts-management person is indicating from within the PartsProcess form (F8) what is the ETA on an ordered part, the system automatically looks (behind the scenes) to see if there is a pending appointment. If so, it compares that appointment's date to the part's indicated ETA. If there is a conflict, the operator is alerted, and several options in solution are offered (including automated appointment cancellation and automated emailed notice to the customer, with option for them to online re-schedule on a date that is conducive to the part's ETA).
That's all cool, but Krystle McConnell at Lake Appliance Repair wished for another option. In particular, she did not want her parts management person to be involved in accepting such automated cancellations as are above described, and instead wanted a different person (perhaps one that better specializes in human interactions) to have ability to regularly review each/any job on which this kind of conflict exists, and to thus call the customer, explain and discuss, re-schedule, etc.).
So, we made the ability.
In particular, the JobsPerusal form (Shift-F7) now sports a new sub-option when you select the main filter category of "Scheduled, Awaiting Dispatch." It's shown circled here:
We believe usage is obvious.
New "Inventory Deployments" Report:
When you are appropriately using ServiceDesk's Inventory Control system, you will periodically be conducting physical inventories -- to see how actual presence of stock at each location compares to ServiceDesk-indicated stock, and to then adjust quantities as reckoned by ServiceDesk to fit what is physically found.
All but inevitably, there will be at least a few discrepancies, and often they are for near innocent reasons. Maybe once in a great while, for example, an otherwise excellent tech forgets to list a minor part that he used (if he doesn't indicate it's use, obviously, the system cannot know it should decrement the reckoned quantity). Potentially, the opposite might occur. Less excellent techs might make such mistakes more often, and more grossly (i.e., forget to indicate use of major and expensive parts, and with significant frequency).
Of course, not all cases are innocent at all. Some may be nefarious indeed, as where a tech is doing his own work independently, and is using your parts on his jobs! (Most service company owners who have employed a significant number of techs over a significant period have seen this happen.)
Besides doing periodic physical inventories, another process that facilitates registering discrepancies is when a tech indicates he used a part from stock which the system did not reckon he had, or when he tells you he has no stock on an item the system reckons he should have. In either case, the system accommodates ad hoc adjustment to reckoned inventory, so as to make it equal what is the evident physical reality.
Regardless of the process for making adjustments, there is always an entry recorded to reflect the fact it was required (it's made to the "Journal of Inventory Movements"). One of our notions in such connection has been, if you suspect a tech of potentially having been overly careless (or perhaps even nefarious) in regard to such inventory items as are entrusted to him, you may review such adjustments as have been required. On that basis, you can make a judgment as to what is probable in such regard.
The problem is, it's a bit painstaking to review these journal entries for the purpose of forming a coherent picture. It's more painstaking, still, if you want compare between and among your techs. So, we made a new report that places perfect information right in front of you (try to ignore the date range and actual numbers as shown; such wierdness is in consequence of the fact I am still using old data, from my former service company, for development and testing):
In the above you can see both the nature of such data as this new report provides, and the path (from within the F11 Reports form) that is needed to produce the report.
Option to Make the "Merchandise" Category of Sale Non-Taxable:
In general, ServiceDesk contemplates that for any sale situation there will be a tax rate that's applicable to materials and one that's applicable to labor. In any SalesJournal entry, there are two columns that are considered to be subject to the materials rate (Merchandise and Parts) and two columns that are considered to be subject to the labor rate (S.Call and Labor).
With the above as backdrop, some folks have elected to use the Merchandise column for things such as mileage, handling charges, etc. Likewise, for some such folks, these are categories that in their jurisdictions are not taxable. So, it was requested that we add an option to make the Merchandise category non-taxable. That option now exists.
To select the option, simply go to your Settings form (Ctrl-F11), and activate the new checkbox option as shown here:
Finished-Form Emailed Tickets Now in .PDF Format:
For a number of reason that we find compelling, e-tickets as sent by SD-Mobile (and/or as sent by SD-MobileLink) are sent in .PNG format. It's a strategy we presently intend to maintain.
When you're working directly in ServiceDesk, by contrast, and it's your intent to email an invoice from within the FinishedForms context, we believe the dynamic is different. In particular, we believe for this context dynamics may weigh in favor of using .PDF.
Thus, we have modified the system so that, in this particular context, the system now sends a .PDF attachment rather than a .PNG attachment.
Expected Core-Returns Now Included in PartsPick Form:
We thank Jeff Miceli from Appliance Tec for pointing out a very major faux pas.
We built the PartsPick form (Shift/Ctrl-F8) to provide a super-efficient venue in which to see (and check-off appropriate movement) of each item that needs to be provided to a tech for his day's roster of jobs, and each item that needs to be retrieved back, because previously provided and not used (whether it was a special-order or spec-tagged item).
It's really a super system. However, there is something it was not doing that positively it should have been doing.
Besides showing items needing retrieval that are in the special-order or spec-tagged category, this venue obviously should have also been showing expected core-return items. Honestly, until Jeff pointed it out, we did not realize we'd omitted such an obvious element of functionality.
However, it's there now.
So long as, on any special-order item, you have appropriately created the expected core-return daughter band (which positively should be created when you know the primary item has a core-return fee), when the tech has indicated use of the primary item, the PartsPick form will list an expectation for return of the core. As with other expected return items, you should only check-off the item when and if you get that core back.
(As a side note, the next item on our agenda in regard to core management will be to extend it to inventory items; presently, express core-return management applies only to special-order parts.)
Enhanced Export to QuickBooks:
We've had an Export-to-QuickBooks feature for many years. In nutshell, you run a SalesSummary report from the Reports form in ServiceDesk (F11), then click on a button to initiate the export. The sequence creates a .iif format file (stands for Inuit Interchange Format), which, when you then import into QuickBooks, creates a series of journal entries, in QuickBooks, that summarize such accounting processes as ServiceDesk took responsibility for.
One aspect of this has been slightly less than favorable. It is that the particular accounting entries -- that you are about to import into QuickBooks -- are something of a black box, until after you do the import and see what resulted, by looking within QuickBooks itself. Technically, you could look in the .iff file to see, but the formatting of data within that file does not lend itself to easy decipherment.
So, the system now simultaneously (while creating the .iif file) also creates a .csv file. When opened in Excel, this .csv file makes it very easy to see what are the particular entries (as debits and credits) that will result in QuickBooks when the corresponding .iif file is imported:
If you are at all familiar with accounting, you know the first numeric column shows debits and the second shows credits (you also know the expressions do not simply mean money-in or money-out, as they do in your checking account ledger).
In addition to this improvement, we also added a system to alert you if the numbers as tallied indicate a reason to suspect a problem with such data as was entered to the system.
Option to Indicate Specific-Purchase-Invoice-Number as Inventory Parts are Used:
The need for this feature arose in conjunction with a client who does much work for Samsung. Turns out Samsung requires this client to claim, on each part used, via the same invoice number on the actual replacement part was purchased. Samsung enforces this requirement by demanding that the old part be returned in the same bag or box that contained the replacement part. That bag or box has a label on it (placed there when Samsung shipped the part) that indicates the invoice on which it was purchased. If the claimed-upon purchase invoice number does not match the number on the bag or box in which the old part comes back, there is a rejection of the claim.
Given this, we had to make a system whereby, as a tech uses each/any part from inventory, he can look at the purchase invoice number that's on its label, and tell the system that's the one he is using (this way, the system can then assure that's the one that's pulled from inventory, and that the same invoice number that automatically goes into the claim).
If you have need for this same alteration in functionality, you can toggle to make this the mode by bringing up the contextual "Cheat-Sheet" from within ServiceDesk's Inventory Control form (F10 is the shortcut for the form, obtain the Cheat-Sheet by right-clicking on any otherwise non-functional space within the form). You'll see the following (circled item), as a new Cheat-Sheet option:
By clicking on it, you may toggle between having this new option turned off (the default) or turned on. If turned on, of course, the strategy will override the default strategy, which is to pull the cheapest instance of an item if it was used on a COD job, or the most expensive if it was used on a warranty job.
If the feature is in fact turned on, your technicians in SD-Mobile will see a dialog something like this, when they are submitting any PVR on which they have indicated use of parts from inventory:
Thus, for each item used, they'll simply indicate (from the provided list) which of the applicable purchase invoice numbers (from within your stock overall) was the one involved as based on the label they see on its bag or box.
BTW, for operability this feature also requires an update to SD-MobileLink Ver. 2.0.93 or above, and to SD-MobileLink Ver. 2.0.68 or above.
Also (this is very important), please note the functionality that uses this has not yet been added into the iPad version of SD-Mobile (aka SDM-i). Please do not at this time turn on the feature if you have techs using that platform. Those techs will have no provision to indicate the invoice number on which each item they used was purchased, and, in that absence, your option to turn on the feature will really throw a wrench into workings of the system.
Default-Restored to Continuously Chime when Indicating Un-Read SD-Mails, But with New Option to Single-Chime:
Two updates back we were pleased to announce that we'd removed the super-annoying constant chiming that occurs when the system is urging you to view an un-read SD-Mail item. We changed it so that instead the system gives you a single chime.
Wouldn't you know it. We received calls from a number of users who want the constant chiming back.
So, it's back.
However, there is also an option (if such is your preference) to go to the single-chime method instead. It's in the green section of the settings form (hence, it's a setting that's particular to each user) as shown here:
Thus, each user may select per preference.
Mouse-Click Initiate-Communication-With-Tech Options:
We have "jillions" of features to facilitate automated and semi-automated communication, whether it's between you and your customers or between and among staff persons within your business. In particular (for communication between staff persons) we have both SD-Mobile (which automatically communicates standard job info outward to the techs and standard performance/completion info back to the office) and the SD-Mail system (among other tools).
Regardless, even if wanting to send a particular tech an SD-Mail, more than a single click (or keyboard stroke) is required. First, you're going to find the SD-Mail function in the general menu (via multiple mouse clicks) or use the keyboard shortcut (Ctrl-F12). Then, you'll either pick the tech of interest (via another mouse click) or you'll type-in his two-character abbreviation.
Suppose you're already looking at the tech's listing (i.e., the one you want to contact) within the DispatchMap, in the Settings form, or in the Create-Job/Sale form. And/or suppose that, instead of sending him an SD-Mail, you want to call him, send him a text-message or, perhaps, a standard, internet-based email.
It's for these kinds of interests that our new feature (suggested by Michael Basich, of Michaelson's Appliance in Tampa, FL) was created.
From any of the above-identified contexts, you may now do Shift/Click on a tech's name, and you'll see something like this:
Just pick the option that interests you, and, instantly, you'll find yourself in a mode to proceed straightforwardly in the indicated task (if picking the "Telephone call" option, the system auto-dials the tech's number for you).
In regard to the telephone number that's used for auto-dialing (or text-messaging), there is a corresponding little change we've made that here bears description.
Prior to now, if you click on a tech's name in your listing of technicians in the Settings form (Ctrl-F1 is the shortcut), and then see the Technician Properties window as applicable to that tech, you would fail to find any box as provided for you to indicate the tech's telephone number.
You would, however, see a box provided for you to indicate the tech's Pager Number.
Yes, that's right: his "Pager Number!"
That is, perhaps, an indication of how far back Rossware systems were providing automation.
But of course today there is virtually no one that is still using pagers. In particular, we don't believe a single Rossware client is now using them as a means to contact their technicians.
Hence, we have changed the box that formerly was indicated for provision of a tech's Pager Number. It's now intended for use of indicating his Telephone Number (probably his cell number).
It is this number that will be used by the
system, if you pick the option (as above described) to initiate a
telephone call to an applicable tech, or to text-messsage (this
particular change, BTW, was suggested by JD at Guinco in Fort Worth,
TX).
Default Own-Company Selection in Rolodex:
Do you use SD's Rolodex (keyboard shortcut if F4) as the place to keep track of contact info (telephone numbers, email addresses, etc.) for your own personnel.
That's precisely what we do here at Rossware. Even though we are not a service-call performing company (obviously), we nevertheless use a couple of elements within ServiceDesk for our own operation. We use the Callsheets, for example. And we use the Rolodex.
In fact, though we have many companies and persons listed in our Rolodex, I noticed that most of the times when I go there looking for a listing it's for a person in my own operation. It thus was beginning to seem a little annoying when I must scroll to find the company listing of Rossware Computing, Inc., and then find the person of interest as a sub-category. Hence, the new feature.
If a company listing in the Rolodex is structured with the company name as a precise match for what you see (as your company name) in the ServiceDesk About form (keyboard shortcut is Shift-Ctrl/A), ServiceDesk will now default-select that company when the Rolodex first displays.
User-Created and User-Based-Subject-Matter Email and SMS Template Usage:
We credit Tony Lott, of Appliance Express in Texas, for this one.
He emailed me, expressing how much today's consumers are learning to prefer electronic communication over phone calls. Of course, his office does too, because emails and text messages are much more efficient and less taxing of limited personnel resources.
Rossware systems already offer, of course, a large number of mechanisms that are designed to accomplish defined kinds of communication electronically (e.g., initial requests to schedule, requests to re-schedule after parts arrive, confirming appointments, etc.). However, there will always be a limit in the variety of defined communication types that we can reasonably design for. Tony's office found itself in a situation where they wanted to define a number of their own communication context types, so they created (and have been using) "templates" for those.
Tony's suggestion was simple. Why not create a provision in ServiceDesk where it can "call out" to such templates, fill in the spaces appropriately, and directly send a perfect email or text-message, as user-selected for the context.
So, that's what we now offer.
Full instructions are in this document.
A Clarification Regarding Fees:
Tony made the kind suggestion that building this feature might be a revenue enhancement for Rossware, via added email and SMS charges. It raises a matter I wish to clarify:
There is no fee from Rossware -- whatsoever -- as connected with sending emails. There is a fee for RoboCalls and there is a fee for SMS messages. I would like to assure everyone understands the difference.
In regard to any of these methods, ServiceDesk may be thought of as the physical telephone in the old-fashioned AT&T voice-communication network. Since you purchased ServiceDesk and via support pay for its updates, your "telephone handset" is covered by that, and there cannot properly be any separate and/or additional charge in its connection.
Thus, when you send an email (and even when you use ServiceDesk to do it), Rossware is not equivalent to the old AT&T. We are not the "carrier" that transmits your email to its recipient. We only provided the telephone handset (which you've already otherwise paid for), and nothing more.
When you use ServiceDesk to request a RoboCall or SMS message, by contrast, Rossware is in that context equivalent to the old AT&T -- in that we provide, in addition to the telephone handset itself, actual means of communication. It's added mechanisms we provide, in other words, that are the "carrier" in this context. We actually buy these mechanisms at wholesale and resell to you at retail. That's why there is a fee, and it's why it makes sense for us to charge separately in this context, but positively would be wrong and unfair for us to charge for sending emails. Again, you already bought the handset, and it is not Rossware-provided instrumentalities that transmit your emails across the internet.
Drag-and-Drop Additions to QuickPics from Within SD:
QuickPics are great. Techs snap pictures with their smartphones; resulting images are automatically attached to each applicable job and machine -- and forever thereafter are immediately available with a simple contextual click. You may even include descriptive captions. Meanwhile, you bear no burden of storage and/or organization. It's all done for you.
But what about when you have a picture file already in your office (i.e., it's a JPEG file in your computer), and you want to put this into that magical QuickPics store?
Until now, there's been only one vector of insertion, and that's by snapping pictures via the provided smartphone apps.
Now there is another vector.
From within Windows, simply drag-and-drop any JPEG file onto the camera icon of a ServiceDesk JobRecord (Current or Archived; it does not matter):
You'll see a little dialog box like this:
Simply provide some descriptive text, then hit Enter. If there are one or more UISs connected to the Job, you'll also be asked in regard to potential attachment to them. Simply proceed with the dialog. With such simple action and scarcely more than seconds, you'll have the desired pic forever attached, as wanted.
BTW, the system is just as flexible as is Windows in
regard to where you can drag-and-drop from. Directly from your
desktop is perfectly fine, for example. Or, suppose there are one
or more pics that are attachments in an email. At least assuming
that you are using Outlook or similar, you can drag-and-drop directly
from those, as well.
Peace and Quiet in the SD-Mail System:
We thank Michael Basich at Michaelson's Appliance for this one. He told me his office is not using the SD-Mail system, because they cannot tolerate the chiming that occurs to alert of unread mail items.
One solution, of course, is to look at unread mail items. Once you look, they are "checked-off" as read, and the chiming ceases (well, until the next new SD-Mail arrives).
Regardless, it is not always practical to immediately look, and in the meantime that constant chiming can be annoying. (I hear you, Mike, in regard to you hearing this chiming annoyance.)
So, now it is changed. Now, in any given ServiceDesk session, there will be only a single chiming sound as any new SD-Mail arrives. When you newly start a ServiceDesk session, there will likewise be a single chiming sound (within about 20 seconds of starting) if your SD-Mail InBox contains one of more unread items.
That's it. That should be all the SD-Mail chiming annoyance going forward.
On the other hand, so long as you have unread SD-Mail items, flashing at top of the screen (so as to keep you visually alerted of items) will continue and persist (i.e., just as the sounds also used to persist).
Vastly-Expanded Options for SMS-Text-Messaging and RoboCalling:
For the longest time, ServiceDesk has offered a plethora of automated and semi-automated email-based methods by which to accomplish needed communications with your customers. A few years back, we added RoboCalling as an optional method for the appointment-reminder/confirmation-request context. About sixteen months ago, we added SMS text-messaging as a third option for that context.
All the above was good, but, in the interim, we've received many requests to have RoboCalling and/or text-messaging added as options in other contexts. That's what we introduce now.
-
Text-messaging Replies. If you've been using text-messaging in the appointment-reminder/confirmation-request context, you know that occasionally (even though the text in itself asks your SMS-correspondent to click on a link so as to confirm the appointment) the recipient texts back with a verbal confirmation or other message. You further know we've configured for this text-reply to be handled via creation of a SD-Mail, which shows you the text from the customer's reply:
The problem is, there has been no convenient way for you to respond back via text. Now there is. Specifically, if you are looking at one of these SD-Mails, just click to Reply. Automatically, the system will recognize the context, and configure to send your reply back as a text:
-
On-Demand, Self-Initiated, Direct Texting. So, you simply want to initiate a text to a customer (or perhaps to an employee or other associate), and you want to do it from your desktop rather than from your smartphone. You have a telephone number that you know belongs to the intended recipient's smartphone. For this situation, simply use a new variation we have added to auto-dialing. The general command to auto-dial (from almost any context where a telephone number is listed) is to right-click on the number. If you wish to text instead, simply make it a Shift/Right-click. This will open the SD-Mail compose window, pre-configured in mode to text to the number you initiated from:
This variation is currently functional in Callsheets, Current- and Archived-JobRecords, and in the Rolodex.
Another way to initiate an on-demand text is: (a) go directly to the SD-Mail interface; (b) choose "New Mail"; and (c) pick "TextTo" as recipient from the dropdown list (then type in the number), or simply type (or copy-and-paste) the target number into the "To:" box to start out with. -
Request to Schedule After Parts Arrive. Whenever you check-in a special-order part, the system automatically checks to see if more parts are still on order for the underlying job. If not, it invokes a dialog. In particular, if it finds that you have an email address for the customer, it offers to send the customer an email, informing you have the needed parts in, and requesting that the customer schedule their completion visit. Now the dialog offers a more expansive set of options:
Old Dialog: New Dialog: 
Please note that each method category (i.e., email, SMS and RoboCall) will be enabled only if the underlying JobRecord has a "target" that is appropriate to that category. For example, if there is no suitable email target in the underlying JobRecord, the email category will not be enabled in the above dialog.
Please further note that, when interpreting which strings of text as present in a JobRecord are suitable as targets for each category, the system will follow precisely the strategy you have setup and defined for use in the appointment-reminder/confirmation-request context. -
POS-Context, Request to P/U After Parts Arrive. This is a close parallel to the above, except the involved communications are asking the customer simply to pickup their parts, as opposed to asking them to schedule. The dialog looks like this:
Old Dialog: New Dialog: 
-
Other Requests to Schedule. You get a request from a home-warranty-company client to contact a consumer to schedule your visit and perform a repair. Or, you get a request from a landlord to do similarly in regard to a tenant's location. Or, you are seeking to try again with a customer that's not responded, asking again for them to schedule for completion after parts have arrived. In any such case, it's long been true that you could right-click on JobRecord's "Scheduling" button to receive some emailing options in this regard. Now the resulting dialog is more expansive.
Old Dialog: New Dialog: 
Please bear in mind both RoboCalls and SMSs carry a small fee (going forward it will be nine cents and three cents each, respectively . . . reduced from the former price of a dime and nickel a piece; we thought it best to avoid any claim about "nickel and diming" our clients).
Integrated 2nd-Man-Required Functionality:
Earlier this month we added a function in SD-Mobile whereby a tech can directly indicate that a second-man/helper is needed on his return visit (he simply checks a box to so indicate). When he has so checked, the system will create an informing AttentionNote in the JobRecord (this is in parallel to what it does when the tech indicates that his return appointment should involve any JobCount value above the default of 1).
While an AttentionNote is nice if look at it, there is (of course) always the chance it will not be noticed. Thus, as another parallel to how above-1 JobCount requests are handled, ServiceDesk will now look, when you are scheduling from a JobRecord, to see if there is a second-man-required AttentionNote. If so, it will remind you of the circumstance, and even offer to prep entry of the second appointment for you. Likewise, once you have created the second-man "Hlpng . . ." appointment, it will delete the AttentionNote.
On-its-Face Indication from JobRecord of S/O Parts Involvement:
If you want to know at-a-glance if a JobRecord has special-order parts involved, there is now on-its-face, visual indication:
The trick (as illustrated above) is any job that has s/o parts involved will have its "Order Parts" button rendered in green.
FundsJournal Entries Now Fully Editable:
Until now, if you wanted to edit a FundsJournal entry in any display mode aside from viewing current entries and in a non-search context, the system would not permit you to do so. Now you are permitted to edit from any display context, including past entries and search contexts. If editing past entries, an extra layer of password protection is invoked.
Instant Link to SalesJournal and A/R Searches:
Imagine yourself in a JobRecord when, for whatever reason, you wish to know what SalesJournal entries have been made in its connection. Or, you wish to know what A/Rs (if any) are pending. Certainly, it's easy to go to the SalesRead form (Shift-F3) to conduct a search, or go to the A/R form (F3) to conduct search.
However, it's not easy enough.
We already had, within the two JobRecord forms (Current and Archived), a hotlink to the FundsJournal form (Ctrl-F9), used so as to instantly see what funds have been collected in connection with a job. It's accessed by right-clicking on a JobRecord form's "enter Funds received" button. Now the ToolTip for that button (obtained by floating your mousepointer over it) indicates further functionality:
And now, when you indeed right-click on the button, you get a set of options as follows:
Pick the option desired, and you'll get instant information accordingly.
Built-in Summary-of-Nets in SalesJournal Search:
When you search in the SalesJournal for entries connected to a Job, whether your search is initiated directly from within the SalesRead form (old-fashioned way) or via the new HotLink (described above), there is a new connected feature. Specifically, the system will provide you with a net summary of values involved:
You don't need to do anything special to make this summary appear. It should just happen, on its own.
Automated Cancelation of Whirlpool OOW Jobs:
We'd thought this had been taken care of ever since 2010. Turns out our belief was mistaken. The SB-DispatchLink functionality that was designed to automatically cancel zero-sale referred dispatches (so you don't have to pay a referral fee) was indeed doing what we'd been told needed to be done for the purpose. It turns out, however, that what we'd been told needed to be done was not actually sufficient. Upon so learning, we determined what would be sufficient, and released a new copy of the SB-DispatchLink utility (Ver. 4.8.7) that now succeeds in this important purpose. If you've formerly been doing these cancellations manually, you should find that, going forward (so long you update to the above-indicated version or later), there is no longer a need.
Two-click Closing of Job as Zero-Sale:
Some people don't realize this, but it's best for every JobRecord to be closed via an appropriate entry to the SalesJournal. In other words, even if there was no charge (e.g., the customer canceled before your technician got there; it was a recall, etc.), it's best for a real SalesJournal entry to be made, even if in zero amount.
One reason this is best is because it officially documents what happened to the job, in terms of its resulting sale amount. Another reason is because, when eventually you are audited by the IRS, that nice man or woman is going to be looking for invoice-number gaps in your SalesJournal (suspecting maybe any such gaps are cash sales that you kept off-the-books). If you have no such gaps, you're going to be in much better shape than otherwise.
Still another reason it's best is because, if you participate in Whirlpool's OOW-referral program, that zero-amount SalesJournal entry serves as the basis by which the SB-DispatchLink utility knows to automatically inform ServiceBench that the referred job was canceled, and to thereby remove it from the list of items on which you'd otherwise be charged a referral fee.
Prior to now, ServiceDesk has had a means to automatically make a zero-amount SalesJournal entry for you, in conjunction with canceling an appointment. Basically, a dialog asks if just the appointment is being canceled, or if the job is as well. If you answer the latter, the systems offer to auto-enter a zero-amount SalesJournal entry for you.
But that circumstances does not always fit, and where it has not the remaining option has been to make a zero-amount SalesJournal entry manually.
Now we've made a direct-purpose shortcut. From any JobRecord that you want to close-out with a zero-sale (and assuming it does not have an appointment to cancel as a means by which to accomplish this), just click on its "Recorded to SlsJrnl" status button. The dialog that's comes up now looks like this:
When you pick that option, it opens the SalesEnter form with the entry line already filled-in for you. You just hit Enter, and the task is done.
QET Export:
Not sure why, but some people wanted to export data as applicable to their QuickEntryTemplates. So, there is now a button for the purpose:
Just click, and follow the prompts.
Overhaul of EDA Mechanisms:
(1) EDA files are now moved from NetData to a dedicated folder called EdaFiles. (2) User will now be offered a default filename that is sensible for the circumstance (e.g., AHS.4P4.EDA where AHS is the specified payer and AHS is setup as a HVC), or MiscellaneousCustomer.4P4.EDA where it’s a non-HVC payer). (3) User will be warned (and guided toward better understanding and action) if using a new filename that reflects solely the date, credit memo number, or similar. (4) User will similarly be warned/guided if using a new filename where one or more files already exist containing the same alpha string (i.e., if I am making AHS456 and AHS123 already exists, I’ll warned)
Improvement in Connect for Assistance:
Altered interface so it makes it much more likely user will make correct choice.
4.8.22 (3/24/17):
Twice as Many Processors to Pick from when Using Virtual Terminal:
Since we introduced integrated credit-card processing several years back, our Virtual Terminal has worked with just one merchant processing company: Cayan (formerly Merchant Warehouse). Sometimes people wanted a choice. Now you have one.
We are pleased to announce Rossware's association with a second merchant processing company: Altiras. We made the very large investment, as needed to make the Virtual Terminal work with this new company, because we believe they are outstanding.
If you are not presently using Rossware's Virtual Terminal, you should be. You'll reduce the time and effort that's involved in running transactions. You'll enhance accuracy and save money. Better yet, Altiras has setup a website and dedicated two human representatives to specially serve the needs of Rossware clients. If you're not already with Cayan and happy with them, we highly recommend that you contact Altiras immediately.
You will, BTW, notice a new control within the Virtual Terminal interface:
As you can see, its simple purpose is to let you indicate which of the alternate processors you are using. If you are presently setup with Cayan, don't worry. Presence of the new option should not affect your operation at all.
Will Soon be Available for Canadians Too:
That's another major reason we made the investment to work with this new processor: unlike Cayan, they can do processing for our beloved Canadian compadres.
That's right. Until now Canadian users of ServiceDesk could not use our terrific Virtual Terminal. With Altiras, they will be able to. The one catch is that coding details as needed for Canadian transactions are a little different, and we have not yet done that added coding. We expect to have it done soon.
Enhanced Comprehensive Searches:
In the last release we announced addition of a new "comprehensive" search option in the current- and archived-JobRecords. What we mean by "comprehensive" is the system will search for all text everywhere, within each JobRecord, for a match to whatever is your search target. In other words, it will simultaneously look in the name fields, address fields, telephone number fields, description of symptoms, narrative histories, ExtraNotes and MoreInfo, etc.
For reminder, this comprehensive search is invoked by use of the Windows-universal search command: Ctrl-F ("F" is for "Find"). If you do this from within an archived-JobRecord, the system assumes it's within archived JobRecords that you wish to search. If you do it from within a current-JobRecord, the system assumes in a parallel manner, but, absent finding any match, offers to automatically extend your search into the archive.
As great as was this addition in its own right, it lacked something. That something was already present in the similar comprehensive search that exists in current-Callsheets (invoked via the same Windows-universal Ctrl-F when in a current Callsheet). It is simply this:
When ServiceDesk finds an item that includes a match to your target, it does more than simply display that particular item (Callsheet or JobRecord). It likewise highlights within that object the particular text that's the match to your target. That way your eye can readily see it.
It's much better this way. Try it; you'll see.
BTW, this improvement was also applied in archived-Callsheets (formerly, it was only current-Callsheets that had the feature), so it now applies in all comprehensive-search contexts.
Print for "All-Techs" New Option in PartsPick Form:
The PartsPick form (Shift/Crtl-F8) was designed with intent that the person in your office who's responsible for moving parts to and from the techs can use the interface live, likely via a tablet, as he she pulls parts from the shelves for each tech, retrieves items back from the tech's return basket, etc. Regardless, because a number of people still like paper, there's long been an option to print for each tech the list of items that should be moved to and fro. But this printing was done individually for each. In other words, you select the tech then pick to print. If you have a lot of techs and want a printout for each, the process could be tedious.
Now the same button that's been used to print for each tech (in the bottom-right corner of the form) behaves a little differently. If you have no tech selected and click on the button, it will assume you want to print for all techs, and act accordingly. If you have a particular tech selected, it will present this dialog:
So, it's pretty simple to get whichever result you want.
Items Anticipated for Future-Scheduled-Use Now Show for Retrieval in PartsPick Form:
Your tech was out on a job with one or more special-ordered (or spec-tagged) parts. For whatever reason, he did not use one or more such parts. However, the job is not done; he is scheduled to go back on another visit, and he still anticipates using such parts on his next visit. Should the system prompt for you to retrieve such particular parts back from him?
Until now, the system did not so prompt.
Now it does. It however prompts in a special color for the
circumstance (grey) to bring notice to the fact that, depending on your
preference, you may or may not want to insist on getting such parts back
at such time.
Direct Emailing of QuickPics Now Available:
Since we introduced the SD-QuickPics feature a few years back, we have often been asked how to include these pics in emails. The answer: it's easy. So long as you have your Windows configuration setup to open the file type (.jpg) in a competent viewer (Windows Photo and File Viewer is typical), you can use mechanisms right within that viewer to email the pic. Honestly, we did not feel enthused to build internal-to-ServiceDesk mechanisms when it's so easy to do it otherwise.
However, in our class at ASTI last month, some attendees pointed out this emailing context does not auto-fill email addresses. Nor does it provide an implicit method by which to include multiple pics within a single email.
Okay, we were persuaded.
Previously, the listing of pics as attached to a Job (or UIS or Visit) would look something like this:
Now it looks instead like this:
As you can see, it's different, and along the bottom contains specific instructions on how to select either a single or multiple items to direct-send via email.
SalesJournal Lock-Against-Edits Partition, New Options for Automation:
Your ServiceDesk SalesJournal is the official accounting record of your sales. If entries have been entered wrongly there, it's fine to edit to correct them, so long as such entries have not yet been directly relied upon for external purposes (i.e., in compiling income statements, tax liability reports, etc.). Once there has been such external reliance, it's important to leave such entries alone. Instead of editing such an entry if it was in error, a new entry should instead be made that adjusts for whatever was wrong in the prior one.
Last year (with release of Ver. 4.7.134) we added a feature to help you police yourself in such regard. Basically, you can tell ServiceDesk to lock-against-editing all SalesJournal entries that precede a particular date (call it a "date-lock partition"). That new feature is accessed through this button in the SalesJournal-Read form (Shift-F3):
We did not it leave solely up to you to think to periodically update the location of that partition. In particular, we simultaneously included programming to make it so, when you complete an export to QuickBooks, the system auto-prompts with a query asking if you'd like the date-lock partition to be moved, for you, to the ending-date of the period you just exported to QuickBooks.
In our class at ASTI, folks requested more options for automation than this. So, now there are several. In particular, if now you click on the button as shown in the illustration above, you'll see this (with new option highlighted in yellow):
If you select that new option, you'll see this:
As you can see, there are many options you can pick from. Pick the one you want, and ServiceDesk will behave accordingly.
Comprehensive Search in JobRecords:
We've always had superb searching options, especially in regard to JobRecords (both current and archived). We have index-based searching that is instantaneous as you type (in regard to customer names, addresses, telephone numbers and emails). We likewise have search bases where the system looks directly within the JobRecords, looking for target matches on any of the above, plus things such as P.O. Numbers. The archived-JobRecord context (Ctrl-F7) has additionally featured searches on street names and any targeted word or phrase within narrative histories.
Okay, good foundation . . . what do we have now?
A few years back we added a comprehensive search into current-Callsheets (one had existed in archived-Callsheets long before that). With your Windows focus in a Callsheet, just hit Ctrl-F (it's the universal in-Windows command to invoke a search; the "F" is for "Find"). Type a textual-search target and hit Enter. The system will immediately search through all current Callsheets looking within all text of each (including Extra- and MoreInfo-Notes) for any instance of text that matches your target. Upon finding any match, it will show it to you.
One day we realized we really should have the same kind of ability in JobRecords. So, now it is there.
From within either a current or archived JobRecord, hit Ctrl-F on your keyboard. Type in whatever text target you are interested in seeking (yes, universals are permitted; just look at the prompt), then hit Enter. If the first shown match is not the one you are seeking, you will see via the prompt you may renew by looking for the next match, etc.
BTW, a big element of new accessibility via this search is narrative Job-Histories in current JobRecords. Until now, there was no search provided for text in that specific context.
As a slight aside, if you have your Windows focus in a narrative JobHistory and wish to select the entirety of the text (maybe to copy to your Clipboard for insertion elsewhere), another tiny addition is you can now do that using the standard Windows command for "Select-All." The command is Ctrl-A.
Enhanced Auto-TimeFrame-Estimator:
The DispatchMap has long had a feature that will insert timeframes for you into a technician's series of appointments, based on parameters you specify (e.g., length of timeframe, average time from one stop to the next, etc.). Since it's much easier to reliably predict when the tech will arrive at his first stop, some companies like to give each first-stop customer the courtesy of a smaller timeframe (maybe just an hour or even 30 minutes). The dialog that's involved in the Auto-TimeFrame-Estimator now has provision to accommodate this.
Option to Disguise Retail Pricing on Parts Labels:
We're kind of surprised this one did not come up sooner.
If you have variable pricing on your parts depending on circumstances, it may be awkward if you have a label on each part that clearly shows some price other than what you actually charged the customer. Hence, you may want to disguise the price, much in the manner that cost has long been an included element on these labels, though it's disguised in a manner (hidden among other characters) that makes its value unobvious, unless you are acquainted with the format of disguise. Anyhow, we now offer the same option in regard to retail price.
To invoke the option, go to the PartsProcess form's (F8) Cheat-Sheet (just right click anywhere in the form that is not an otherwise operational place).
Select the option that's indicated above, and you'll then see a dialog where you can turn "Disguise Retail Price" on or off.
Global Search Characters Now Functional in Archived-JobRecords P.O. # Search:
This option was long available in the Current-JobRecords form, but (for whatever reason) we discovered it was not available in the Archived-JobRecords form. There are various global-search-character schemes (the general idea is you can put a fake character in your search target, and a potential match can have anything at all in that position). Our scheme is simple. Just use can use an asterisk as a global:
As you can see, the prompt has instructions on this, in case you forget.
Multi-Select (and Multi-Job Summaries) Now Available via F12 Search:
Most new features are based on user suggestions (which are sometimes close to being more like requests, or even demands). Occasionally, an idea pops into my head independently. Often it's the kind of thing where, as I am working in an interface (helping a client or testing functionalities I've just tweaked), it occurs to me that it "feels" like I should be able to do a particular thing . . . and, damn it, if your senses tell you that it would be an intuitive thing to do, really, the interface ought to allow you to do it.
This was one of those instances.
I found myself looking at the results list (references to jobs) in the F12 form. It occured to me I might want to print (or email) a summary regarding a particular selection of jobs from that list. How obviously logical it would be if I could multi-select the particular references whose job summaries I wanted to include, and then print or email accordingly?
So, that's what this new feature is. Go to your F12 CstmrDbase-Search form. Type in any text target. From among the listings that result, use standard Windows multi-select to pick the items whose job-summaries you wish to have detailed in an overall summary, then click on the button to proceed:
The dialog that follows is where you'll pick to print or email.
Miscellaneous:
Date-picker calendars have been added to the onscreen NARDA's date boxes (it means, if the date is not already auto-filled, you may select as wanted from a calendar, instead of needing to type it in).
Automated TelNmbr formatting in Current- and Archived-JobRecord Forms.
Option to make automated mileage calculation round-trip or one-way (QET-specific); option to make mileage amount accrue to Merchandise SalesJournal category as opposed to Labor.
When sending emails via the SD-Mail Compose windows, you may now include multiple attachments.
New field, DateOfPendingAppointment, added to JobPerusal form's "Print Summary of Found Items" option.
Option to specify QET-specific Leave-Behind Douments.
Updated Zone-Scheduler Handbook:
Embarrassed to discover this handbook had never been updated to include description (and instructions on how to use) two major augmentations (flowing-pipes and intelligence-augmented-holdbacks). That is now corrected. The handbook may be conveniently accessed via this button:
up in the top-right corner if ServiceDesk's ZonePlanner form (Shift-F5 is the shortcut).
Right-Click to Open ThisCompanyBulletinBoard.rtf:
That cool Bulletin-Board feature that we announced with release of Ver.4.7.130?
Well, by it's nature the content of that Board is something you might want to change with some frequency. So, it should be more convenient than having to manually navigate in your system to find the underlying file.
It should be more convenient, and now it is. Just right-click in the Bulletin Board, and the underlying file will automatically open, ready for editing.
The EmailedDispatchReceiver (EDR) Can Now Process for First-American:
If you don't know, this utility automates reception of dispatches from a number of entities who send their dispatches via email, e.g., AHS, Old Republic, Fidelity National Home Warranty (also formerly did Warrantech and NEW via such means when they still depended on emails). For years, many people asked us to add First American into the capabilities list. But there was a big impediment. First American sends their dispatches in a PDF document that shows only an image of the dispatch text, rather than presenting the dispatch as text itself. It's much tougher to parse text from an image.
Regardless, we finally cracked that nut. Now the EDR can do First American too.
Multi-Select Now Available in SD-Mail:
Many folks don't know about Windows multi-select. Obviously, when you mouse-click on an item in Windows if becomes selected. For example, you click on an item to select it and hit Delete on your keyboard to delete. You can click down on an item and drag some place else to move it. All this is great, but what if you want to do the same action to multiple items at once?
That's where Windows multi-select comes in. It's very simple. If you already have one or more items selected and you want add another particular item (or remove an item from what's already selected), simply to a Ctrl-Click on that. If you want to select a whole range of items, click on the first to select it, then do a Shift-Click on the last.
It's that simple.
Now that you know what multi-select is, you can know what is the meaning of this improvement. You can now do multi-select in your list of SD-Mails:
If you want to delete a bunch of items, for example, select all the ones you want to delete, then click on the Discard button (much faster than doing each individually).
Option to Email Payroll Reports:
Historically, payroll and commission reports have been viewable on-screen, or printable. Now you can email them as well.
New Rossware PDF-Writer:
In a number of contexts, folks have wanted to automate (or at least semi-automate) the process of emailing a PDF document.
An example situation is when emailing a parts-order request to a parts vendor. A PDF document can be configured as a "form" that has all relevant request information, and asks your vendor to fill-in boxes to indicate how he is fulfilling your request (e.g., is he shipping, back-ordering, did he find the part is NLA, etc.). Similarly, you may email a PDF document that works as a status inquiry on prior-ordered parts. Back in the old days (before SD-Mobile) some companies also liked to email their technicians a PDF image of each job-ticket/invoice on the current day's roster -- this worked as their very method of dispatching to their techs, typically with intent that each tech should print the set of tickets via his home computer.
Anyhow, there is a bit of technological hurdle in making these processes occur. In general, it's easy to create a PDF document. You simply install any from among dozens of free PDF "printers." These install like a regular printer driver (the piece of software you install in Windows to control a standard physical printer), but, instead of connecting to a piece of actual hardware (and to produce paper output), their output is instead a PDF file. Thus, when you want to make a PDF document from any Windows application, you simply use its facility to print, then choose an installed PDF printer (from among the standard Windows list of printers, once you have one there) as the target print-to location.
The hurdle exists because you want ServiceDesk to automate creation of an email and you likewise want it to simultaneously attach a PDF file to that email. ServiceDesk can create an email for you just fine. It can send input to a PDF printer just fine. However, it can't attach the file that's produced by the PDF printer to the email unless it knows what file (i.e., location and name) that PDF printer produced. That's the difficulty.
We solved it years ago by finding a particular PDF printer that allows an application (like ServiceDesk) to make a request directly to it, specifically specifying the particular file that it should produce. With this ability, ServiceDesk can direct the PDF printer to create its output with a particular name and location, then find the result there and attach it to your email.
The name of the program we found to do this is pdfFactory. It's maker sells it for $50 per install. Until now, when you first went to do one of the types of emailing that has depended on that product, you'd be prompted to go to the maker's website and download it. Now we fixed that. You don't have to buy pdfFactory any more.
We now provide you with a Rossware-branded PDF printer. We call it the Rossware PDF-Writer, and the right to use it is inclusive to your ServiceDesk purchase and/or support.
From this version forward, instead of being prompted to install pdfFactory when first wanting to initiate a relevant action, you will instead be prompted to download and install the Rossware PDF-Writer (and you'll save $50; yahoo!).
If you already have pdfFactory installed and you want to switch to use of the Rossware PDF-Writer (yes, we do believe it's better), or if you simply wish to install the Rossware PDF-Writer because it's a darned good PDF printer and sometimes you want to print to a PDF document, you may directly download it here.
New PartsProcess Date-Filters
We had a request to be able to filter by appointment date when working in the current-PartsProcess form (aka "F8" form). So, we added it:
The operation is straightforward, but please note items will not show unless they are connected to a job that has a pending appointment (and also, of course, where the date is not excluded by the filter).
Raw-Data XML-Attachments Now Included With DispatchLink-Inserted Dispatches:
It's a common issue. You are using SB-DispatchLink (SBDL), SP-DispatchLink (SPDL), LG-DispatchLink (LGDL) or Samsung-DispatchLink (SSDL). The utility pulls a dispatch from its connected entity and creates a Callsheet for you. You suspect it did not place in all the available information as perfectly as it might have. Perhaps you are able to look in the online data and find stuff there that was not placed in the Callsheet, or perhaps it reads differently than in the Callsheet.
Is it possible that Rossware's utility did not process the data as it should have?
The short answer is yes: certainly, it is possible.
However, it's impossible to know if any apparent fault is in the utility or if it is in such data as the entity (e.g., ServiceBench) handed off to the utility -- unless we are able to see exactly what data was in fact handed off.
That is the purpose of this new feature (i.e., to allow such visibility). From here forward, we are configuring each of the utilities to include a raw-data file that will be a precise copy of such data as was provided by the connecting entity when it handed off the dispatch. Each Callsheet will include a hyperlink reference to its respective file:
A simple double-click on that hyperlink will display the direct, actual data for you:
You may then see and compare, with intent to determine if there was any information provided that our Rossware utility might (if better coded) have been able to handle for you in a more beneficial manner.
If you find yes, you will then be well-equipped to contact us at Rossware. You can show us the actual data, and how our utility did not handle it as beneficially as it might have. We'll then be poised to know exactly what we can do to make it better.
In the alternative, you may find that the underlying entity (e.g., ServiceBench) is not handing off such data as you need to have them hand off. If that is the finding, you and we will then be well-equipped (we often do go to bat for you in situations like this) to go to that entity, and "hold their feet to the fire."
For context, we have always in the past gone through the process of analyzing such underlying data on our own (though sourced from a more difficult to access location), when a a concern has been brought to our attention. This new feature allows you the opportunity to examine it on your own first (it likewise provides us with a much easier source when we wish to examine).
There is a counterpart to all of this. Please don't expect us to invent data that the entity has failed to hand off to us. And please don't expect us to present you with better data than they have handed off to us. This new feature allows you to see precisely what they have handed off (and in each specific instance), so that you can judge for yourself.
As of the date of this release, we have so far only updated SBDL (Ver. 4.8.1) to create the underlying files and connected Callsheet hyperlinks. We'll plan to have the same new feature within each next update of the other utilities. Please note you must update to this 4.8.3 release of ServiceDesk (or higher) for the new style of hyperlink as is involved to function. If you have not done so, the response to double-clicking on any such hyperlink will be a message indicating that the document cannot be found.
Automated Insertion of Mileage-Fee and Quantity in On-Screen Narda Claim:
We owe this one to a new client in Canada (Michael Moncada of Northern Electronic & Appliance Services, Inc.). He explained that he has many contracts with third-parties that specify varying mileage rate schemes, and, absent any method to automate accurate insertion of the correctly-applicable amount in each instance, he would likely end up failing to claim for significant amounts of otherwise collectible sums.
We would not want that to happen.
If with this update you go to your QuickCommonEntries form (Shift-F1) and choose to edit for any entry, you'll see some new boxes:
The obvious concept here is, if you have any QCE client in regard to whom you have an agreed-upon mileage rate, you should use these two new boxes to put in the non-surcharged unit-radius and the rate-per-unit that applies beyond that radius (I use the expression "unit" because it is kilometers that will apply for Canadians, miles for the rest of us).
Equipped with this new information, something new and wonderful will happen anytime you import new information into an on-screen Narda. The system will see the mileage-rate structure you've setup for the underlying client. It will grab the address for the underlying service location and it will grab the address for your service office. It will then make a behind-the-scenes call to a Google API that will rapidly return a driving-distance figure. Based on this driving-distance figure (and your underlying values), the system will look to see if the Google-indicated driving distance exceeds the indicated radius. If so, it will insert to your on-screen Narda like this:
For claims to most entities, we believe this is exactly the fill-in you will need. However, we know that some of the underlying third-parties use the applicable fields differently (i.e., one might expect the mileage-fee to be in one box, while one might expect it to be in another). If you encounter a situation where these insertions need to be configured differently for a particular entity, please let us know and we will alter accordingly.
We do need to provide a little caveat in regard to this release. You might notice that with this release the versioning series has gone from 4.7.x to 4.8.x. We reserve such series changes for instances where there is a significant structural change in one or more underlying files. In this case, to accommodate the two added boxes, we had to alter the structure of the file that contains your QuickCommonEntries data. On first use, the system will automatically build a new QceFile in the new structure (the new filename will be QceFile.4P8 as opposed to the old QceFile.4P3). Each other instance of ServiceDesk will be prompted to close and re-open in updated mode, so as to use the new file. The caveat is this: each of the utilities that also use your QceFile (e.g., SD-MobileLink, SB-DispatchLink, SP-DispatchLink, etc.) will still be using the old file, until you update each to its respective latest release (which, naturally, will cause them to likewise use the new file). What this means, bottom-line, is older copies of those utilities will not see any post-4.8-series changes you make in your QCE data, until and unless they are updated to their own post-change versions.
(FYI, versions of utilities that are updated to use
the new QceFile are SDML Ver. 2.0.54, SBDL Ver. 4.8.0, SPDL Ver. 5.1.0,
LGDL Ver. 2.1.0, SSDL Ver. 2.1.0, EDR Ver. 4.7.0. There is no need
to worry about any such utility-update if you are not actively using
it.)
Terrific New Performance-Testing Tool:
Does it ever feel like your system is running slow? Do you ever feel like you'd like to have an objective measurement, to tell you just how quickly it is or is not performing?
We must confess, our RSS clients (those who lease cloud-hosted servers from us) have sometimes found themselves feeling this way. Sometimes, on investigation, we've concluded the problem is solely because of a slow internet communication on the client side (nothing we can do about that from here). On a number of other occasions, however, we've found there were issues causing slowness right within the systems we provide, and of course those are matters we have had to directly address. Regardless, it has sometimes been difficult to determine which is the case. It's especially difficult when our users are trying to make this determination on their own.
This new tool is designed to let you directly see just how well your system is doing (or ours on your behalf), and regardless of context. It runs a series of processes, and times how long the system takes to perform them. Based on a comparison to some benchmarks, it then gives you an indication of the result.
To run the new tool, navigate via the ServiceDesk MainMenu, as shown here:
The next thing you'll see is this:
.
When you click to run the test, you'll see something like this:
Please note the caption at top indicates actual time as elapsed when performing the test. The blue bar indicates your system's time as a graphic (shorter is better), compared to a typical-fast (but not blazingly-fast) system (green), and as compared to a typically-slow (but not abysmally-slow) system (red). If your result is almost as good or better than typical-fast, you're doing pretty well. If your result is closer to the typical slow, you're not doing so well. If your result is beyond the typical slow, you are doing quite badly.
Please also note that besides the standard (Test functions equally) option as above shown, you may select to Emphasize Disk Access or Emphasize Processor Operations. The general idea is, if your system is slower than it should be, you can try each of the lopsided tests and see if it's more likely one area versus the other that's slowing things down.
We think this will be useful for all users.
Regardless, especially for our RSS users, we suggest you run it when
things are working well, so as to form a benchmark of what to expect.
Then, if it feels like things are running slowly, run it and compare.
Reported results will NOT BE AFFECTED by internet speeds, so this test
can be quite definitive in letting you know if the server systems in
themselves have an issue that needs to be addressed, versus there
potentially being some problem in the communication between them and you
(please note that in some instances there can potentially be a
communication bottleneck at our end, in which case it will still be
incumbent on us to address).
LG-Direct-Claims Now Verified as Fully Functional:
I must sadly confess we were slow to perfect this. We added basic direct-LG claims functionality some while back, but it required real-world testing (and real-world debugging) to truly make it fully succeed. Thanks in significant part to longstanding and patient assistance as provided by Heather Michaelis at J&M Appliance, Inc. (in Redlands, CA), you should find the functionality is now perfect. Thank you Heather!
Option to Exercise Dispatch-Options in Regard to Multiple-Selected Techs:
Everything evolves.
In the ServiceDesk DispatchMap you may do a simple click on a technician's name at the top of his list of appointments. In consequence, you will get a list of many things you may do, in terms or providing him information as connected to that list of jobs:
That list was not always so long. It grew one item at a time as particular persons wanted new options. Then someone wanted something entirely new. It was pointed out that, when you have lots of techs, it takes considerable effort to rotate through each and make the request of what you want in terms of output for each, especially where you want the same output for all of many technicians. We were asked to make an option to request a particular output once, and have it apply to all techs. So, a number years back we did that.
Recently there was a new request. Now it turns out some people want to request a particular output from the above list, and they want it to apply to many of their techs, but not to all of them. So, absent any new facility, the only way to do that has been by individually clicking on each of the particular techs for whom the output is wanted. Again, if you have lots of techs that are involved in the desired output, this can be considerable work.
Hence our new feature.
The longstanding path to get to the dispatch-options list but as applicable to all techs is, when you are in the DispatchMap, use the QuickKey shortcut Alt-P (it's the common Windows 'Print' command). We've now augmented the options you'll get when going there, as follows:
| Old "Print" options in DispatchMap | New "Print" options in DispatchMap |
 |
 |
If you pick the new option, then pick any particular dispatch-options output, you'll be presented with a list of your technicians that looks something like this (though your list of techs may be shorter or longer, depending):
From this list you can use the common Windows multi-select commands to pick the particular set of technicians that you wish to have included in the output. It's that simple.
Option to Initiate Inventory Inquiry from Within Callsheet- and JobRecord ExtraNotes:
The ToolTips that you'll see when floating over with your mousepointer (but in ServiceDesk, not here; what you see here is just an illustration) say it all:
Option to Create a Protected-Partition in Your SalesJournal:
Likely we should have done this one a long time ago.
After you've made any external reliance on entries in your SalesJournal (as when, for example, you've done exports to QuickBooks, filed sales tax liability reports on basis of a SalesSummary Report, etc.), it's important that entries from that period remain as they were when reliance was made. To state it otherwise, you should not change the amounts as involved in entries from such a period.
It does happen, of course, that sometimes you find there were erroneous entries in an earlier period. If that's the case and it's from a period that was externally relied upon, the proper fix is to make a current-period adjusting entry, as opposed to by changing that entry from the past.
Regardless, the design in ServiceDesk has been to rely on you and your staff to be smart in this regard. Needless to say, it has not been a smart element in ServiceDesk.
It is fixed now.
Your SalesRead form (Shift-F3) has a new button:
Just click on it, follow the prompts, and it will do precisely as it says.
If you are wondering, yes, locked-period changes will still be permitted if with use of your MasterPassword. Even then, however, it will be in presence of a dialog that warns appropriately.
Also (and if you are also wondering), yes, there will be an auto-prompt to create the partition each time after you do an export to QuickBooks.
Finally, yes, the ApplicationsJournal also becomes locked per the same Protected-Partition date as you specify for the SalesJournal.
Major Upgrades in Full-Custom Source-of-Business Survey System:
First, let's be explicit in agreeing that it is super-important to have a solid and accurate understanding regarding which marketing investments are having what effect in bringing customers to you. You really need to know this. Where a particular marketing endeavor is producing tremendous "bang for the buck," you likely want to do emphasize that one more. Where another is hardly performing in spite of large cost, you likely want to abandon it. It's critical information.
Since a long time ago, ServiceDesk has had what we sometimes call a "canned" source-of-business survey system (see Chapter 10.G in the ServiceDesk Manual). It's structure is pre-defined, and all you must do to set it up is create the list of yellow-page ads that is applicable to your business at the time you are surveying (yes, it was created when most service companies looked primarily to the yellow pages as their primary source of new COD calls). For the shape of the world in which it was developed, this system provides superb structure and analytics, all pre-built and assembled for you (well, except for your list of yellow-page ads).
But the world changed. Service businesses began using several advertising mechanisms that our "canned" survey system did not contemplate (most especially, of course, the internet). Around eight years ago (see notes under release of Ver. 4.3.94, below), instead of seeking to modify our "canned" system to make it accept every new possible variation and nuance, we decided to build a new system (as an alternative to the still-existing "canned" one) that offers complete, unbridled customizability, and while still permitting a hierarchical query structure (i.e., depending on the answer to one question, it can lead to a different set of sub-questions, and depending on what's answered there, it can lead to another new sub-set, etc.).
Regardless, while robust in its core, this new, Full-Custom Source-Of-Business Survey system has been somewhat bare-bones in terms of what's offered on its periphery. It has not, for example, offered any built-in analytics on survey results, other than just providing you with raw-numbers regarding the quantity of hits in answer to each survey question (and even there it's been an un-augmented Excel spreadsheet that provides such info, which (and at least absent further analysis) is quite less than exciting on its face. Our thinking had been, in exchange for our triumph in having provided you with full and complete flexibility at the core, you may need to perform the final and ultimate analytics on your own.
Recently (upon talking with a client in need), I decided it was long past time for us to finally beef-up this Full-Custom Source-Of-Business Survey system. Here is a list of present improvements:
-
The Exported Results-Tally Report now includes not just the quantity of hits-in-answer per query. It also includes a figure indicating the amount of revenue earned from jobs which, when surveyed at the outset, resulted in a hit on that answer. To state it more simply, it's now not just quantity that's reported; it's now revenue too.
-
In regard to both quantity and revenue, the Exported Results-Tally now includes not just raw numbers, but also does some underlying math to provide you with added columns that indicate what is the average per-day rate as applicable to hits on each item (both quantity and revenue) and what is the percent-of-total-overall as attributable to each.
-
Since results data is now stored in a much improved (more information-dense) manner, it is now possible for you to conduct your survey continuously, yet report on only a particular, date-defined sub-period. (Previously the Exported Results-Tally was inclusive to whatever actual/total period as was included in a particular survey setup.)
-
Since it now contains six results columns (as compared to the prior just one), the Exported Results-Tally now also has informative column headers, plus an overall header at top indicating the date range included, and other elements of enhanced formatting to make the information more obvious and attractive.
-
When a CSR has been prompted to conduct the survey (this happens when scheduling a new job) and is mid-way into it, then suddenly realizes that a prior question was answered incorrectly, he/she can now hit Esc to re-start the sequence. He/she can also re-initiate and replace a prior-completed survey, so long as doing so before the Job/Sale transition (just right-click on the Callsheet's Criteria button; this has always been a method to manually initiate the survey queries, if not wanting to otherwise wait for the auto-prompt).
-
Many businesses receive jobs via automation (whether via SBDL SPDL, LGDL or SSDL), in which case (at least most typically) a CSR will see a Callsheet with appointment info already filled in, and will do the Job-Sale transition without ever having typed into the Callsheet's Appointment box (which is the normal trigger for invoking the survey). Until now, these instances of incoming jobs have escaped the Full-Custom survey. Now they are captured too. Specifically, when a user does the Job-Sale, the system looks to see if a survey was completed. If not, the survey query invokes at that time.
-
If you choose now to use a .csv alternate as your source definition file, it no longer must be direct-designated in lieu of the more proper .xls instance. It can simply be an added file, while you maintain designation of the .xls instance as your actual source. Each station, if seeing a same-path and otherwise same-name .csv alternate, will use that alternate for the purpose of loading the survey structure for survey-taking purposes. Thus, each station will load much faster, and there is no concern with non-Excel equipped stations being able to load. Even better, there is no need to switch the Settings form based designation back from .csv to .xls when wanting to export a Result-Tally report, because it should simply be set and always stay as a .xls designation there.
-
There is no longer a concern with different stations "seeing" the source file via different absolute paths. So long as you place your source file in the NetData folder on your server (which, really, is the only logical place), ServiceDesk will behind-the-scenes appropriately interpret that path for each station.
The
applicable mini-manual has also been updated to reflect current
changes. We think you'll find these improvements finally make our
Full-Custom Source-Of-Business Survey system into the super
robust tool that you have wanted and needed.
Direct Claims Transmission for LG:
Most of you enjoy doing direct claims submissions to ServiceBench and ServicePower. There is no need to first save a claim file and then upload it. Instead, ServiceDesk directly uploads the claim for you. Boda bing, boda boom: it's done!
We also had direct claims submissions working with LG between 2008 and 2010. However, in that latter year LG changed to its then-new GSFS system, which lacked the ability to receive direct submissions. Since then, y'all (at least if you are an LG an servicer) have been using the comparatively old-fashioned file-upload system for your LG claims.
Well, now you can be fully modern again.
A little while back, LG finally added ability in its
GSFS system to accept direct claims, and with this release of
ServiceDesk you may employ that ability. Just make the appropriate
pick when going to transmit your claim.
Minor Upgrades in Scheduled-Job-Exports Type 3, 5, 6 and 8:
Formerly, these reports (Alt-F3) had a field to
indicate the amount of revenue received in labor on each job, but not
the amount received for parts and merchandise. That added field is
now included.
Export from the Special Situations Advisory:
The heading says it all. Go to the form
(Alt-F11) and you'll see the new button for this.
New "Bulletin Board" Feature:
Forgive me, but I think a lot of folks are gonna like this one.
Like a lot of things these days, it was not exactly my idea.
Janice Salman called from Just Press One. She runs a call-center with a crew of CSRs, handling calls for a growing number of Rossware clients. She said the quantity has now reached more than 30, and it's getting tough for her CSRs to keep track of the particular details (details that are needed to guide each customer conversation) that vary for each particular client. She wondered if I could suggest a feature in ServiceDesk that, as a ServiceDesk instance comes up for any particular client, would volunteer the particular details of which a CSR needed to be reminded in regard to that client.
Well, I couldn't think of anything existing that seemed to be a super fit.
So, I came up with something, and I think it's a tool that will prove very useful to many of you, whether you have Janice's team taking calls for you or not.
In a nutshell, this is a feature that allows you to add a Notice section (aka "Bulletin Board") to the right of the Callsheets in your standard ServiceDesk interface. Here's is an example of what it might look like:
Of course, I only created a bit of imaginative text, in the above, for the purpose of this illustration. It's solely to provide a notion of some of the kinds of things you might want to do. You could use your Bulletin Board for anything you might like. You can use any color of text you want (or any combination of colors). You can can use any font and any font size. You can use any desired formatting. The general idea is it's a new space, that you can make all yours, and you can change it as often (or as infrequently) as you like.
You might notice, in the above, you can have hyperlinks in your Bulletin Board. If a user simply double-clicks on such a link, the system will immediately open the target. (Please note these must be in the explicit-face-text, SD-Link-acceptable format; embedded hyperlinks will not work in this context or in any other direct-within-ServiceDesk context.)
To implement this new feature is easy.
To start, open a text editor that is capable of saving in .rtf format (stands for RichTextFormat). WordPad is a good choice, and it's automatically present in every Windows computer. Compose the text that you want, and format it in whatever manner you want (i.e., color of text as wanted, type of font, font size, underlining, bold, italics, etc.). Then save your document in a particular name, in a particular file-format, and to a particular location. Specifically save to the sd\netdata folder on your server, in .rtf format (happily that is the native-save format for WordPad), and with this filename:
ThisCompanyBulletinBoard.rtf
That's all you must do.
ServiceDesk will see the file there, will expand on its right-side to show your composed text, and will show it. It's that simple!
Of course, any time you want to change what's shown in the Bulletin Board, just open the file again, make any edits you want, and save. Again, it's that simple. If you decide you do not want to have a Bulletin Board displayed any more, delete the file, and ServiceDesk will respond.
A few notes:
-
If any user's desktop window does not have sufficient width for the expanded view, that user will of course not be able to see the expanded view.
-
After you've added the file, deleted it or otherwise changed it, it may take up to one minute before ServiceDesk sees the change and adapts its view accordingly (the reason is it only checks for such changes on a once-per-minute basis).
-
As you may note in the illustration, the general background color in the Bulletin Board will be configured to display in the same color as you've picked for ServiceDesk itself. So as to assure your text is readily visible, please be sure to pick font colors that are a good contrast with whatever you have picked for that background. It's true that from within your text editor (WordPad or similar) you may potentially pick a particular font-background color for particular text, but for most purposes that tends to look less elegant and read less well (i.e., as compared to a transparent background).
-
Regardless of as just stated, it may sometimes be beneficial to selectively pick other-than-transparent font-background colors. One purpose, for example, could be found in the fact WordPad (if that's the text editor you are using) insists on automatically adding standardized hyperlink formatting to any url that's typed. In other words, it underlines the text and makes it blue (as in IAmHyperlinkFormatted). As you can see in our first illustration some distance above, this blue color may be a poor contrast from your background. A sensible solution (at least in this particular circumstance) could be to change the font-background color on this particular text to something non-transparent and contrasting, such as you see done here.
You'll likely notice that, in addition to adding a font-background color for the hyperlink, I also spiffed up some other formatting elements, as compared to the first example. Basically, you are similarly in control of formatting -- in terms simply of how you set it up from within WordPad (or similar), and in terms of what will ultimately fit within the canvass provided (if you're putting in a lot or of large text, you'll have to simply see by trial and error whether it fits in the space we've provided for you).
We hope you'll love this feature. Please let us know.
Improved
Auto-Formatting of Claims for AIG/ServiceNet:
Recently it came to our attention that claim submissions to ServicePower with AIG as the expected-to-pay party were being rejected, owing to absence of indication as to whether it was a "sealed-system" repair versus a normal repair. Upon inquiring with ServicePower, we learned the expectation on AIG claims is for a particular field in their claim format (specifically, it's the field they title "EIA or MFG Repair/Fault/Defect Code 1" to be populated with the code "8002" to denote that it's a sealed system repair, or "8001" to denote that it's a normal repair (why they do not tell us these things in advance is anyone's guess).
Anyhow, with knowledge of this expectation, any of y'all could have made your AIG claims sail through just fine, simply by typing that "8001" or "8002" code into the particular box of our on-screen NARDA, as needed, before transmitting your claim. To be clear, it is this yellow-highlighted box (as shown with assistance of the Translation-ToolTips) that, on ServicePower-formatted claims, is translated into that particular ServicePower field:
Regardless, rather than putting you to the trouble of having to type, we'd much prefer to automate. So, we've now coded so that if you check the on-screen NARDA's dedicated "Sealed System Repair" checkbox, as shown with yellow-highlighting here:
. . . and if it's on a claim being submitted to
ServicePower, with AIG or ServiceNet configured in the underling
JobRecord as the paying party (and if you have not otherwise placed any
text of your own into that box) -- if all that is true -- ServiceDesk
will behind the scenes populate the needed claim field with the needed
"8002" code. Correspondingly, if that "Sealed System Repair"
checkbox is not checked (but the other factors all remain true),
ServiceDesk will behind-the-scenes populate the needed claim field with
the needed "8001" code. It should make successful submission of
these claims into being once again a simple matter.
Flip-Flop and QET-Insertions Now Available Within Archived-JobRecords:
Ken Owen from Service Care in Birmingham, AL pointed to the need for this. It arises, he said, when it's discovered days or weeks after the job was prior completed and "put-to-bed" that the wrong party was claimed against. Perhaps you claimed against Lowes, for example, and now it turns out you need to claim against Whirlpool. When you need to flip the party-info sections around and/or do a QET-insertion within a current job, it's simple. But those automation facilities were not formerly available in the Archived-JobRecord context. Now they are.
SMS (aka "Text-Messaging") Now available as Alternate to Emails and/or RoboCalls (Specifically, for Appointment-Reminder/Confirmation-Requests):
Folks have wanted this for a while. On the surface, one might think adding SMS (stands for "short-messaging-service") would be easy. It was not, but (and regardless) we've done it.
In the next few months we plan to add text-messaging options in several other contexts. For now, it's available in the context of sending out appointment-reminder/confirmation-requests (as an alternate/supplement to emails and/or robo-calls).
In addition to adding the option itself, we also enhanced your control in regard to determining which particular telephone numbers will be the target for robo-calling and/or text-messaging, and over which (of potentially multiple) email addresses may be the target for automated emailing. In fact, we've given you a number of new options in how to scheme such control, with intent that you may pick the particular scheme that best suits your operation.
For detailed instruction on how to use these new schemes (and, indeed, how to implement text-messaging in general), you may click here. In the alternative, from within ServiceDesk you may go to the Settings form (Ctrl-F1 is the shortcut), and there click on the button as shown here:
That will yield this interface, and if you click on the indicated button it will open the same instruction document as above referenced (that button as present within ServiceDesk will be a more handy link when you later want to reference the same instruction document):
Please note that text-messaging requires subscription to SD-CyberOffice, and there is a fee of 5 cents for each SMS.
As one other note, if implementing text-messaging from
ServiceDesk you'll also need to assure you are updated to SD-CyberLink
Ver. 4.5.52 or above. The reason is because some of your
text-message recipients may very well choose to reply via text.
It's only SD-CyberLink Ver. 4.5.52 or above that's equipped to detect
those replies, and to convert them into SD-Mails.
Durable Indication of Whether Each Appointment Was Customer-Confirmed:
Our appointment-reminder/confirmation system has long had a wonderful benefit: you can walk into your office in the morning and, with a quick glance in your DispatchMap, have instant visibility regarding which appointments have been customer-confirmed, and which have not (it's then a simple task to manually call the minority who have not, in the effort to verify if it makes sense to go ahead and send the technician).
At least the above works generally.
However, if you happen to have techs that open their SD-Mobile applications before you've made this review, the little hyphen symbol that indicates confirmation ("-") will be replaced with a check-mark that indicates the technician has received the job. So (and at least for quick, on-it-face review purposes), the confirmation information is lost (it's still present in each narrative JobHistory, but that's less immediately obvious).
We now have a solution for this potential loss (and it's why in the title to this section we use the word "Durable").
It's in a new, toggle-to-optional-display-mode feature in the DispatchMap. From within the DispatchMap, simply hit "F" on your keyboard (we'd like to have used "C" for "show-Confirmed", but the "C"-toggle was already in use, so please think of it as the "F"-toggle for "show-conFirmed") (hit "F" again or Esc to toggle back to normal). In consequence of using this toggle, all the normal check-statuses will disappear, and a new and bolder symbol (specifically, a bold dot) will show to distinguish confirmed appointments from non-confirmed ones. Here is an example:
This showing will endure (and hence be "durable") even if the normal/standard check status has been changed to something else.
This feature also requires that you update SD-CyberLink to Ver. 4.5.52 or above, for it's only that version and later that are equipped to set a new (and durable) behind-the-scenes field with notice of the customer's confirmation (it also means that if you're looking at appointments whose confirmations were processed via older copies of SD-CyberLink, the durable indication will not be there).
If, BTW, you forget the key for this toggle, it's been added to the DispatchMap's "CheatSheet" (right-click in any otherwise non-operative DispatchMap space to display):
So just check there.
Improved Legend-Key
in DispatchMap:
This shows what's meant here:
| Old | New |
 |
 |
To see the DispatchMap's legend key, the toggle is "K".
Easier Embedding of Kudos to Your Website:
In March I sent an email to y'all announcing a really fantastic new feature.
Creation of this feature stemmed from a conundrum all servicers face. You work like the dickens to make your customers happy, and succeed grandly 99 times out of a hundred. However, happy customers seldom post online reviews. On the other hand, unhappy customers (those 1 out of 100, or fewer) very often post online reviews. The result is, on the basis of any new prospect checking online reviews as basis to judge your company, you end up looking much less awesome than you really are.
Our new Kudos system was created as a means to solve this.
It's an outgrowth of the fact our CyberOffice survey system was already auto-generating a very large quantity of supremely superlative comments from your customers (well, at least it's been doing so if you are using this survey system; if you are not, you should be). These praising comments have been great for the ego of our users, but had not formerly been harnessed for their enormous value otherwise.
Now they can be.
Specifically, you can add elements into your website that automatically display real praising comments from your actual customers. These comments are dynamic, forever and automatically updated, showing with live and recent dates. As such, they make a "sale" to any browsing prospect (assuring you are the company they should select for service) like you'd not believe.
Our metrics indicate companies that have implemented such displays are approximately doubling their online-generated business!
So, finally, you can turn-around the online, review-presented picture that prospects get of you. Finally, you can make real and direct use of all those praises that were formerly going unused. It's awesome.
Regardless, there had formerly been a little impediment for some. To embed this new presentation into your website required use of a technology called PHP. Some web development environments do not make it easy to work directly with PHP. So, the main thing that's new in regard to this post is the fact that, as of now, you can use a different (and much easier-to-embed) technology called JavaScript.
For full instructions on how to embed this great feature in your website, click here.
Like other CyberOffice functions, this one too has a moderate fee schedule attached, details here.
Upgraded DispatchMap:
Better Speed
Some Rossware users have DispatchMaps that are big, covering huge expanses of territory. They also have scores of technicians, meaning there are hundreds of appointments within any given day's schedule. Given the traditional method as used by the underlying machinery for creating any new view position (as you "pan" your view Up, Left, Down or Right), these large elements have sometimes resulted in slower than instant "re-painting" with each such panning change. It was potentially even worse for those using a centralized server (such as involved with Rossware's "RSS" cloud-server hosting), because in that situation all the imagery processing is done by a single machine, whose resources are shared among multiple users. These delays are not something most users have experienced, but, for those few who have, it's not fun when you want to move from the bottom of your Map to the top (or vice versa), and must wait a second or so between each movement.
This issue is now solved!
We've created an entirely new behind-the-scenes methodology that, for those who've experienced such delays, should entirely eliminate them. Indeed, whatever was the speed of "panning" that you prior experienced, it's guaranteed to now be faster. It's possible (if your prior speed created zero perception of delay, which was indeed the typical scenario) you will not notice the difference, but the fact is acceleration will be there.
Mouse-Drag Panning
In conjunction with the above-described speed-improvement, we have taken occasion (coterminous with the same work) to upgrade a few other DispatchMap elements.
Most notably, you may now do something within the DispatchMap you have likely found yourself intuitively wanting to do -- and feeling like you should be able to do. Specifically, you may click down with your mouse and drag your viewing position in any direction wanted. Try it. You'll like it.
Improved Screen-Size Adaptation
Additionally, we have refined the DispatchMap's ability to intelligently adapt to larger screen sizes.
As background, several years ago we often had trouble persuading new users to upgrade their screens to the minimum screen-size that ServiceDesk demands (which is 1024 X 768 pixels, aka "XGA"). Gradually, typical screen sizes began growing larger. When we realized that a significant quantity of users finally had screen sizes larger than than the XGA minimum, we further realized it would be beneficial if the DispatchMap expanded to take advantage of such larger-available screen space.
That's been a feature for a long time now (i.e., ServiceDesk expands, to potentially fill your screen, when moving into the DispatchMap). However, the expansion was not in every instance seamless. A complicating factor is that we design your Map with panning positions that assume an XGA-size display. When your actual view window is bigger, one or more such panning positions may no longer make sense. Earlier we'd programmed a somewhat clumsy adaptation for this. The present adaptation is much improved.
When doing this improvement, BTW, it occurred to us we might do still more. The present expansion scheme allows an expansion up to, potentially, the full size of the particular screen (where you have multiple screens) in which ServiceDesk is running. It occurred to us some users (particularly those with very large maps, who also use multiple screens) might enjoy an expansion that takes advantage of multiple screens (i.e., will expand, if needed, across more than one). We have not at this point done such coding as would be needed to make this happen, but are curious as to whether it's something some of y'all out there might like? If so, please let us know.
New Report: Office-Person's Productivity:
Over the years, ServiceDesk has grown to be pretty darn strong in regard to providing you with a large basket of superb analytics (aka "metrics"). You may, for example, examine a plethora of attributes regarding technician performance, or analyze a variety of measures concerning company performance and profitability. There are even methods for assessing burdens as compared to profitability between and among your various High-Volume-Clients.
Many years ago, ServiceDesk did not have so much strength in the analytics area. This strength has grown gradually, as users have demanded better insight into particular areas of visibility, and we have built in response.
Regardless, one area of analytics has remained sorely limited -- notwithstanding that at least one client has repeatedly asked for this particular hole to be filled. I feel terrible that I kept failing to find my way toward creating the new report he so much wanted, and first asked for (I believe) well more than two years ago. Anyhow, I committed to myself that I'd no longer permit other matters get in the way of this . . . and, Eureka, I've now done it.
The prior neglected area involves assessment of productivity between and among office personnel.
To be clear, there were some prior measurement methods available. The Result-on-Dispatches Report, for example (F11-->T-->D), shows (among many other things) the quantity of jobs originated by each office person, along with the quantities and percentages that led to first-time-completions, completions otherwise, parts-ordered, no-shows, etc. The ScheduleJobsReport (Alt/F3-->J) creates an export from which you can direct-mine for a plethora of details regarding jobs as created by each office person.
Regardless, these prior sources did not directly measure the quantity of a great many other actions that office persons are typically involved in. Our new report does.
This new report finds its home in the Reports form, which is QuickKey-accessed by striking F11:
It runs much like other reports in this venue, and when complete will display something akin to this (depending of course on your own data and instruction parameters):
As you can see is suggested by the sub-title, this report uses JobHistory notes to compile a tally of events as managed by each office person.
To get an idea of how a report like this might be gleaned for information, just take a look. At a glance in the first column, you can see that "JG" was most productive in creating new jobs, while "ML" was considerably more productive in creating appointments outside of initial job creation (just look for the largest numbers as seen in the first two columns, above). "ML" was also big on managing appointment changes. Going on the down line, you can compare productivity in several other areas. "JJ," for example, was the largest actor in managing PartsProcess (special-order parts) activities, and "LB" was just barely behind. In the farthest right "Totals" column, you can readily see that "LB" participated in the greatest quantity of actions overall (at least in terms of what we are managing to measure here).
You may notice there are two groups of listed office persons, with a gap in-between. Basically, those in the first group are pulled from your current-at-the-moment "office-persons-roster" as maintained in your ServiceDesk Settings form. Those in the second group involve note entries with other office-person abbreviations (i.e., ones that are no longer found in your current roster).
Like most of the reports in the F11 venue, this one too has been built with a "Checking-Data Export." Basically, once the report displays, there is a new button within the lower-right of the form:
Click on that button, and the system will create an export that explicitly shows the data it relied upon in compiling the analysis for you. This can be very useful if you are seeking to verify integrity in the numbers, or just better understand what stands behind them. It also can enable you to do your own different kinds of analysis, directly on top of what is contained within the export. Here's a section of export as created from the above report:
As you can see, it lists each note that it pulled from JobRecords as applicable to the report period (it's the note itself that must fit within the date range, not the JobRecord), and indicates what kind of action it judged the note to involve, and which person was involved (a blank in those columns indicates the system did not deduce any tally-able action on basis of the note).
Try the new report. We think you'll like it!
Miscellaneous:
Upgraded LG-DispatchLink to optionally upload narrative history. Also, restored code regarding availability uploads to do math trick with LG-reckoned burdens (undoing change as made 5/25).
Made it so change of a UIS as attached and navigated to from JobRecord re-flags any pending appointment as needed new upload.
Made it so you can right-click on a Callsheet's Criteria button to invoke a SourceOfBusiness survey.
Added function for auto-add to PartsHotList when
s/o item is marked MvdToStk.
Made it so spec-tagging a part and checking in a
s/o part re-flag an appointment for upload.
Fixed fact that when click in archived JobRecord history and it occludes AfterNotes, then release, the controls on the AfterNotes did not reappear.
Changed calls from DispatchMap to Bing and Google to use "https" instead
of just "http".
Added filter in ResultOnDispatches report that causes it to exclude ShopJobs.
New A/R Search:
We'll give credit for this one to Jackie at Landers Appliance. The impetus is Whirlpool's new method for honoring replacement-parts-warranty. I'm referring to the arrangement where, instead of giving you credit when having purchased a replacement for a failed-and-formerly-replaced-part, the vendor instead gives you a new part. Jackie's business makes an A/R to manage the expectation for these replacements (much as they would an expectation for money credit). Yet, when her company's main vendor ships the replacement, they do so with absolutely no reference to the particular job (or "claim") it is associated with. Thus, it's tough to match the incoming part with the particular A/R that was setup to assure it is received.
The solution we came up with is:
-
I have just added a new search function in the Accounts-Receivable form (F3). It allows you to do a search (and for any string of characters) in the Notes section as applicable to your entire set of A/Rs.
-
Jackie will make it a practice, when creating the special A/Rs that are for this described purpose, to put the partnumber (which is expected to be received back) into the notes of each such A/R.
-
When a part arrives that is involved in this replacement-parts-warranty situation, she'll use the new search feature, to thereby locate the A/R that's applicable to that part.
Here's what it looks like:
Of course, you can use this new search to look for an A/R containing any string of text of any kind. It does not have to be a part number you are seeking there.
New All-Appointments Display in
DispatchMap:
Credit for this one goes to Brenda at Saginaw Valley Appliance. Brenda said her company gets a lot of cancellations, which opens near-term vacancies they are anxious to fill. She said they indeed use the DispatchMap's longstanding "Show-Jobs-Needing-Scheduled" feature, which is intended (in part) to help fulfill this need (it's the one that shows orange "pumpkins" as location-references for jobs that need scheduled, and green pumpkins for any appointments that are further out than the displayed date and which have been marked to indicate the customer "wants-sooner"). But, she said, they often can't find suitable jobs (as needed to fill holes) via this category of display. In consequence, they find themselves going through just ordinary appointments that are scheduled for further into the future, to see if any can be moved up, so as to fill near-term holes. She said this is somewhat laborious, and asked for an easier method by which to rapidly and instantly see all those further-in-the-future appointments.
So, we made the new feature. Here's the reference to it in the DispatchMap's Cheat-Sheet (right-click on any empty location on the DispatchMap to see its Cheat-Sheet):
So, the general idea is, when you select this option, you'll see the same set of orange and green "pumpkins" that display with the old and longstanding option that's listed just above it. However, you'll also see blue pumpkins (yes, blue) to signify the location of each other appointment that's currently pending, but for dates other than the actual displayed date. It is thus now possible to see your entire appointment roster in a single graphic display.
As with the other "pumpkins," a simple click will of course open the underlying JobRecord.
Improved Visibility into Spec-Tagged Items:
Now we answer to Mark at Convenient Appliance Service. Mark called to say he needed better visibility regarding what inventory items are spec-tagged, both from the inventory-management perspective and from the perspective of Job-Management (i.e., when looking at a JobRecord, there should be an easy means to see what's presently spec-tagged to it).
So, we've done two things.
First, the InventoryControl form (F10) has a new display option:
This new option will list every inventory item that has a current spec tag. Thus, there is no longer need to peruse through the raw-View, as there was in the past.
Secondarily, we added a new link-to-show function in the JobRecord form (F7). Reminder regarding availability of this function (and of its method) is obtained when you float your mousepointer over this form's "Tag-Part-for-Visit" button:
So, just as the ToolTip suggests, do a right-click if you want to see inventory items as presently tagged for that job. In result, the system will open your InventoryControl form, configured to show the new display (as described in the entry just above this one), but poised to list only such items as apply to the job from which you linked.
Show-and-Link Regarding Underlying HighVolumeClient in A/R-Aging/Breakdown-by-HVC Report:
This one was to fulfill a request from Ian at The Appliance Guru. He said his company has a very large quantity of clients who are setup in the HVC category -- so many that, on reviewing A/R-aging with breakdown by HVC (the sequence to obtain this report is F11-->A-->B), it's not possible to recognize each such company based on the mere abbreviation alone.
In solution, we now display a ToolTip over each/any HVC line-item in this report, as you float your mousepointer over it. The ToolTip provides the full name of the underlying HighVolumeClient:
While doing this, it occurred to me that, additionally, you might want to do a quick-link to the underlying QuickEntryTemplate, as applicable to any HVC line-item you are looking at (suppose, for example, you see one with that's got too many A/Rs that are too old, and you want to look at that company's QET to review elements of your arrangements and contact-info with them). If you simply click on any HVC line-item in this report, it instantly opens that underlying QET for you.
(If you are wondering, BTW, why displayed A/R ages in the above report are so very old, it's because it's data from my old service company, which was sold many years ago.)
Miscellaneous:
Every release contains numerous small improvements and fixes. Usually, they are either sufficiently small or technical so as to warrant no description in this particular blog. However, there a few small items in this release we should at least briefly mention:
-
There is now an export of FundsJournal Entries (in the F9 form, use standard functions to filter for display, click on the Print/Export button, then choose export as opposed to printing).
-
In the InventoryControl form, the "Find-Qty-and-Loc's-of-Specific-Item" report (accessed via F10-->I-->F) is now scrollable, as needed for companies that have more than 30 technicians. (Also improved showing and scrollability in the Tabulate-Values report.)
-
Changed the warning about the SD-Mail folder having too many items in it. Now it will allow a great many more items to accumulate, before warning you there are too many.
New Integrations with External Mapping Tools (Open-Route-in-Bing
and Optimize-Sequence-via-Google):
At Rossware, we are continually striving to reach an elusive target: providing the most perfect-possible system for every user. Even in a static world, this would be a tough goal to fully reach. But it's tougher still because the world is not static. Suppose, against all odds, on one magic day we actually achieved our goal. The next day, we'd again be short, because overnight the world would have changed.
Everyone of you, our users, is continually facing new sets of operating dynamics as significant to your business. The computing environment is likewise (and in and of itself) constantly changing (new operating systems, new communication modes, etc.), and the set of potentially connecting tools and entities (to which our systems can interrelate and otherwise integrate) are changing too.
In particular regard to new capabilities as offered in this release, we've long had two external-map-utility integrations that many were enjoying, when suddenly both became less available (or at least less useful) than before.
First, we've long had a method where ServiceDesk will compile the list of stops that you have planned for a technician on any given day, and direct-pass to MapPoint's routing optimization engine. MapPoint churns through the set of addresses. Accounting for road layouts and even traffic patterns, it deduces a sequence of stops that will minimize driving time. It spits the result back, and ServiceDesk sequences the tech's stops accordingly. Many have loved this feature, in spite of the fact that, to use it, you must purchase and install MapPoint. Sadly, as of January this year that purchase was no longer an option. Microsoft stopped selling MapPoint.
Second, many have likewise enjoyed using the feature where, by simple action in the DispatchMap, you may open a technician's route in either MapPoint or in GoogleMaps. More have enjoyed the latter because GoogleMaps is free, and is available absent any separate install. About a year ago, however, GoogleMaps changed its interface to one that most of our users found less helpful for multi-stop route-analysis (often the reaction was to blame us here at Rossware for this change; honestly, we were not responsible for it). Until very recently, there was an easy solution in that GoogleMaps would permit you to revert to their "Classic" view. Recently, however, GoogleMaps removed that option
So, at Rossware, we faced the conundrum where two valuable, system-integrated tools were suddenly less available (or less helpful) than before. We needed to find new tools with which to integrate that would be, hopefully, as good or better than the old ones. In this release, we have done precisely that.
In regard to using an automated routing-sequence-optimization engine, we found a superb MapPoint replacement in an online service provided by Google. At least so far this service is free (which is obviously better than MapPoint), and it even returns its optimized solutions more quickly than does MapPoint.
In regard to opening a technician's route in an online mapping resource that has the same benefits as the old GoogleMaps, we found a superb replacement in Bing Maps.
To give you easy access to these new options, we also had to modify the applicable menu and Key-Mouse paths.
For automated routing-sequence-optimization, you may continue to use the same Key-Mouse action as was formerly dedicated solely to MapPoint optimization. That action is still (but now somewhat differently) described in the DispatchMap's CheatSheet:
| Old Description from DispatchMap CheatSheet | New Description of Path (right-click in any non-functional spot of the DispatchMap to get this CheatSheet) |
 |
 |
Since this Key-Mouse action now gives you multiple options (we have retained the old options for those who still wish to use them), instead of immediately doing the optimization via MapPoint, as before, it will now take you to a new, "Link-to-External-Map-Resources" options list, where you may pick the particular action desired:
If wanting the new optimization, for example, you'd pick "G" from the above. If wanting the old MapPoint optimization, you'd pick "M."
The old path for opening a tech's route in an external map was by clicking on a tech's name at the top of his list, then picking from what was beginning to become a very long list of options there. Rather than making this particular options list even longer still (i.e., via direct addition of yet another new option), we instead removed the old and multiple "Open Route in . . . " set of options, and replaced with a single option that, like the Key-Mouse action above-described, opens that same new "Link-to-External-Map-Resources" options list:
| Old list of options as obtained when clicking on a tech's name at the top of his list | The now-simplified list of options |
 |
 |
So, there are now two paths to this newly-expanded (and now brought together in one place) set of options. You may use the Cheat-Sheet indicated Key-Mouse action (Shft/Ctrl-Click on either the tech's name or on any in-location-show appointment reference), or you may do a simple-click on a tech's name at the top of his list, then pick "Q" per the right-side image above.
For those who hated the change as made in GoogleMaps, we think you'll love using Bing Maps instead. For those who loved the automated routing-sequence-optimization, we think you'll find Google's engine is very effective.
It is ironic, perhaps, that we are now providing an alternative to Google as an online source for map-opening a tech's route, while newly embracing a different arm of Google for routing-sequence-automation. C'est la vie!
If you are wondering, BTW, yes, the open-route-in-Bing option has indeed also been added within SD-Mobile/w (i.e., the Windows version). We'll also add it to SD-Mobile/i (that's the iPad version) as soon as we are able.
New Option for POS-Insertions List:
We've had many clients who, in the POS environment, wanted ability to insert line-items to POS tickets, but as pulled from other-than the inventory system's MasterPartsPlan, SmartParts listings (as typically applicable to special-order parts) or to serialized inventory as pulled from the SD-Dealer setup (these are the three pull/line-item-insertions that have formerly been available).
So, we've now added this ability.
You may make a custom list of the particular insertion options you want want to have for your setup. Your list will need to have four columns. The first is an item identifier (roughly equivalent to a partnumber), and will (when selected from the POS context) be inserted to the partnumber column in the POS ticket. The second is for item description, and will be inserted (obviously) in the description box. The third is for price, and will (again, obviously) be inserted to the POS form's price box. The fourth column is for an indication if the item is to be deemed as non-taxable. If yes, you should simply place within this column/box the expression "NO TAX".
Once you've made your list (and as above-described), save it in comma-delimited format as PosInsertionsList.csv. Save to the \sd\netdata folder on your server. ServiceDesk will see your file there, and then make use of it.
Specifically, you'll see a new option come up (this option will be activated only is ServiceDesk sees the indicated file) when clicking into the partnumber box in any POS line-item:
Pick this new option, and your dropdown insertions option will be pulled from the list you have created. If you pick an option for which "NO TAX" was designated (and assuming you've picked one of the FinishedForms that includes the line-item-based tax-exempt checkboxes), that line-item will automatically so check for you.
New Management Tool: Quick-View on Callsheet Status:
You've likely recognized that the caption bar at the top of ServiceDesk has an alternating display to let you know if you have Callsheets needing attention, past-due for attention, the quantity and so on. But, they only show you an indication of such Callsheets as are applicable to you. If you are a manager, you might want to know such indications as applicable to your entire staff, as a group. This new tool is for that purpose.
Specifically, if you float your mousepointer at the "four-corners" intersection just between where all four Callsheets meet . . .
. . . the caption bar at top will momentarily change to give you a system-wide synopsis on the status of all pending Callsheets.
Option to Use Half-Hour Increments in Auto-Time-Frame-Estimator:
Our DispatchMap (F5) has long had a tool that will create a series of time-frames for each appointment as assigned to a tech, based on parameters you provide (Ctrl-Click on the tech's name at the top of his list).
Until now, the time-frames as inserted have been in whole-hour increments only (i.e., if your parameters would have otherwise made for sub-hour increments, the system would simply round to the nearest whole hour). Now there is an option to have it round to the nearest half-hour instead. To invoke the option, bring up your DispatchMap's CheatSheet (right-click in any non-operative space), and pick this option:
In result, we are now able to produce something like this:
Whereas, before, you would have seen nearest whole-hours only.
Augmented Intelligence when Using Option to MakeVacationEntries:
In the ScheduleList form (F6) there has long been an option to create
multiple "Unvlbl" type entries in one action, as particularly applicable
where a tech will be on vacation for multiple days. Until now, the
Job-Count value for these entries has defaulted at 8. Now, the
system will look to your Technician-Properties setup for the technician
involved (Settings form, click on the tech of interest).
Specifically, it will look to see what you have set as the maximum
JobCount value that this tech can handle in a day. If you have set
a value there, it will insert that particular value for these entries,
as opposed to the default of 8.
QuickLinks to ApplianceVideo.com's "How
to Replace this Part" videos:
Among Rossware clients are many ambitious, creative and ingenious people (if you wish to know, we're pretty proud to be serving such a bunch).
Anyway, Matt Janoweicki and his team at Ace Appliance (Toledo, OH) began a few years ago in building a treasure trove of extremely professional videos, each showing the complete sequence of steps as involved in replacing a particular part. They put the whole trove online (and it continues to be fast-growing) in a website called appliancevideo.com, and are now making a serious business out of the enterprise.
Recently, Matt and his team asked if Rossware might be interested in making some integrated ties into those videos. It seemed like a good idea, and so now has been done.
In fact, it's been done for both ServiceDesk and SD-Mobile.
The link from within ServiceDesk is via the PartsProcess form (F8). To open the "how to" video as connected with any part number, just do a Alt/right-click on that part number:
That action will immediately query the appliancevideo.com website for any videos it has as associated with that part number. The website will display with any such videos selected.
If you forget the above-described mouse/key action, don't worry. It's another of the tricks that's described in the contextual "cheat-sheet:"
As in the case of other contextual cheat-sheets, it's accessed by right-clicking in any otherwise non-operative portion of the form (e.g., for the F8 form it's easiest to right-click in the colorful label area at top).
For information about how to use the new link from within SD-Mobile, refer to the SD-Mobile WorkDiary.
Auto-Grey-Toggling in PartsPick Form:
The PartsPick form (Ctrl-Shift/F8) was designed as an onscreen venue where you easily see each item that needs moved to/from a tech, and check-off such movements as have actually occurred.
It's a very powerful tool, and we designed with a philosophy engineered toward enforcing conscientiousness in the user. In other words, we did not want users to simply look at the surface of items for which movement was expected, check-off whatever was moved, and ignore everything else. We wanted to assure users stayed really on top of the whole list of expectations, paying due attention to each and every item.
To achieve this purpose, we made it so each item of expected movement must be toggled in each session. Specifically, it must be toggled to red (to indicate movement is indeed occurring) or to grey (to indicate that item is being deliberately left as-is for the time-being).
Overall, that's a good purpose, but some users routinely were in a situation where the system expected a large list of items back from the tech, which they were deliberately leaving with the tech pending an expected (but not yet scheduled) future appointment. It was rather a nuisance to have to manually toggle-to-grey each of these items, each time, before any other movements could be registered. So, we added an option. It's referenced in the text when you click on the "Record Movements" button, but without all items toggled as per expectation. Historically, that click would produce a message that simply told you you must toggle all items. Now, it adds a little paragraph:
That added paragraph is there to guide you to the newly-added option. Follow it's prescription, and you'll see this:
If you choose the first option, obviously, you'll get the result it promises.
Upgraded SD-Mail:
I'll tell you a story.
When I first created the SD-Mail system, it was before regular internet email had become the mainstream feature and practice it's now been for the last . . . well . . . almost 20 years. I'd seen a movie in which a within-business electronic mail system featured prominently (1994's "Disclosure," with Michael Douglas and Demi Moore); I thought the feature looked cool and useful, so I immediately wrote a similar one into ServiceDesk. Though the feature was indeed cool, it was a very short time later when regular internet email began to go very much mainstream, and its capabilities were far more robust. Given this, I assumed that any usage for my system would quickly go by the wayside, as folks moved to usage of full internet email instead.
I was wrong.
It turns out, to this very day, most Rossware clients use SD-Mail like crazy. And, since SD-Mobile was introduced (with inclusion of its own tie-in to SD-Mail), they use it even more, for communication to and from techs. I am gratified, for it's nice, when you've invested to build a tool, to see that not only is it heartily used, but its usage endures.
Regardless, over all these many years our simple SD-Mail system has never been upgraded. Really, within ServiceDesk, it has persisted in a state that's all but identical to my original creation. The only real advance was extending it into SD-Mobile, and there's an interesting twist on that. When I built SD-Mobile's own SD-Mail interface, I made it far more modern and capable. Since then, ServiceDesk itself has lagged far behind SD-Mobile in regard to SD-Mail, and it was ServiceDesk that needed to catch up.
This release accomplishes that.
In fact, we've taken essentially the same SD-Mail interface as has prior existed in SD-Mobile, and have now built the same into ServiceDesk. It looks like this.
Likely, you will immediately see this interface looks much more modern and capable. And it is. No longer are you limited to seriatim (PgUp and PgDn) rotations among your 'In' items (instead you can direct click to look at any item of interest, and in any order). No longer must you choose between leaving an item in your 'In' box, versus tossing it entirely (since there is now a 'Saved Items' folder into which you can move it). No longer must you complete and send an outgoing email before leaving your current session, else lose it and have to begin again (since you can also save these, as drafts, to your 'Saved Items' folder). No longer must you manually type in your Send-To targets (since you may now click from selections in a dropdown). Regardless, you still have the option to type-in a target if that's your preference (many of us keyboard-centric people prefer the speed that is maintained when keeping our fingers on the keyboard); you can even tab right back into the recipients box if making a list of multiple recipients (i.e., type G→R→Tab→D→S→Tab→A→M if sending a mail to Glade Ross, Dave Somer and Art Manoogian).
Besides these user-interface improvements, there are a plethora of others behind the scenes. For example, the entire and underlying folder structure has been improved. Instead of each user's mails sharing the same \sd\Email folder space, for example, each user now gets his/her own folders, along with 'In' and 'Saved' subfolders too. It's much better organization, and will produce improved operating efficiency. Additionally, the email copies that are placed in the \sd\OldMail folder will now on-their-face indicate sending and receiving parties.
Overall, we think you are going to like this improved SD-Mail system much better.
There is one caveat. It applies only if you're using SD-Mobile. Because this system puts outgoing emails in a new subfolder (and in a newly modernized format), it's important that you also assure your SD-MobileLink program is updated to at least Ver. 2.0.25 (which right now is the current release). This version is equipped to pull outgoing mail items (as directed to your techs) from the new structure. If you were to send SD-Mails from the new structure to your techs (and if still using an older copy of SD-MobileLink), that older copy of MobileLink would not be equipped to forward those SD-Mails onward to your techs.
New Search Function in Inventory Control:
In the InventoryControl form there is a "View Raw Data" option (F10→I→V). When this option was made, it was not believed it would have much operational use (the biggest reason we made it was so you can simply see what the direct underlying data looks like). However, it turns out some people are using it with some frequency, particularly when wanting to manually edit spec tags. Given that, we have added a search function there. To invoke it, use the conventional Windows command for the purpose (Ctrl-F, the "F" is for Find).
New Accommodations for Spec Tags in Inventory Control:
When we first made spec tags, we thought they would be sort of a light-weight, minimal-consequences feature. Honestly, it's how we intended them. Turns out folks have wanted to make very robust and extended use of them, and it's pushed us to continue to upgrade and increase associated capabilities. This is another instance. Actually, it's two others.
First, if you are looking to see what quantity you possess of a particular stocking part (and in what locations, F10→I→F), it may be important to know that one or more of the indicated items are presently tagged for other jobs. The system will now let you know.
Second, when you are wanting to order restock, it could be important to know that one or more of the items that presently satisfy your minimums are tagged, and so you may need to order restock where otherwise you would not. Again, the system will now let you know.
Alternate Part Numbers Now Have Operational Significance:
For a very long time, our MasterPartsPlan (Ctrl-F11) has featured a SupplementalInfo window. Click in the vertical green band just to the right of any line-item, and its SupplementalInfo window will display. Among other things, in this window, you can list up to five alternate part numbers, for the primary listed item (these are in addition to the two alternates that can be placed directly within the line-item itself). The sad thing, all this time, has been these five alternates have simply been present there for you to see and review, but have not otherwise entered operationally into actual use.
This is now changed (and, actually, this change was shortly after the last prior entry in this blog, the one just below).
Now, any alternates that you list are included in all the applicable as-you-type drop-downs. So, say your main listing for an item is ABCD, but you have a SupplementalInfo alternate for it listed as EFGH. You can type either of the targets, see it in the dropdown, and select either for identification of the part of interest. BTW, this same enhancement extended into SD-Mobile as well.
You May Now Make "Fake" Technicians:
Since forever, ServiceDesk has allowed you to use "fake" serial numbers in a UnitInfoSheet (though, of course, we use the somewhat more uppity expression of "pseudo-number"). Since October of last year, ServiceDesk has also allowed you to make "fake" appointments (see entry in this blog accompanying Rel. 4.7.2) -- though again, for formality, we use the expression "pseudo." Now we introduce a third "fake" actor.
The genesis for this one came, actually, from the same shop that led us toward the last one (Guinco in Fort Worth, TX). Jeff Guinn called to explain how they are now finding it almost essential to specialize each of their techs within particular areas of competence (laundry, refrigeration, cooking appliances, etc.). The problem is they want to keep most of their appointments unassigned until the day prior, but it's important from within the DispatchMap to see which jobs (and how many) fit into each competence category. For this reason, Jeff and his team created some artificial technicians. In the Settings form (Ctrl-F1), they created a tech called "Laundry," one called "Refrigeration," and so on. In result, they obtained list areas in the DispatchMap where each appointment could be temporarily assigned (for the kind of competence it required), until the day prior, at which point it would then be assigned to an actual/true tech. In other words, they used the device of a "fake" technician to create a semi-unassigned category: not assigned to any particular/actual tech, but nevertheless assigned to the competence category.
Jeff reported that, though generally the scheme was working well, it had some shortcomings. One of them was that ServiceDesk, not knowing that "Laundry" and "Refrigeration" were not real techs, would within the DispatchMap dutifully draw route-lines between each assigned appointment. This made the DispatchMap look like an awful mess. In many other places as well, treatment of the fake techs, as though real, created issues. What was needed was some mechanism that would allow these fakes to be treated more genuinely like the unassigned category, within the DispatchMap, and not like a real tech otherwise.
So, we have now added a new technician property. If you go into your Settings form (Ctrl-F1) and click on any tech listing, it of course brings up the TechnicianProperties window as applicable to that tech. Here is what it looks like now, with our new addition:
If you actually check the new box, you'll see the system removes most of the other settings options, because they cannot realistically be applicable to other than a real tech:
(Please note that if, when selecting to make a tech fake, you have already picked options that make no sense for a fake tech [such as to indicate 'Using SDM', for example], the system will not undo those settings [even though they become no longer visible]. To fix any such situation, you should uncheck the fake-property box [so as to make such settings again visible], fix the wrong settings, then check again.)
There are a few score of operations where ServiceDesk tallies through your set of techs for a huge range of purposes. We have endeavored to modify everyone of these so as to ignore techs as now designated fake, except for the particular purpose where you may want them treated as though real (specifically, where you are using as a device to make a competence category, for temporarily assigning appointments, within the DispatchMap). It's possible it will be discovered we missed one or more such operations. If you discover this, please let us know.
New "Global" Part Number Search:
ServiceDesk tucks parts information into quite a few places. There are important operational reasons for this, such as the fact special-order parts are best managed via a system specifically tailored to their purpose, while stocking parts are best managed via a system differently tailored to their purpose. Regardless (and as is true with any kind of machinery), to attain a gain in one attribute of performance a price must paid elsewhere. In regard to parts management in ServiceDesk, one such price is the fact, if you happen to be interested in reviewing all of your company's dealings as applicable to a particular part number, you might need to look in a variety of places.
Let's suppose, for example, you are interested in seeing everything your operation has had to do with part number 341241. It's possible this part has been special-ordered one or more times. To find any such events, you'd need to do a search in the current PartsProcess area (F8-->M-->type-the-target-characters-->hit-Enter), and do the same in the archived context (Ctrl-F8-->M-->type-the-target-characters-->-hit-Enter). It's also possible 341241 is a stocking item, and, if so, you might want see both what is your stock-movement history on it, plus inquire as to what you have in stock presently, and where. To separately determine these elements, you'd need to go your InventoryControl form, and there do two different searches (F10-->U-->P-->type-the-target-characters-->hit Enter for history of movements; and F10-->I-->F-->type-the-target-characters-->hit Enter for current stock at each location). It's possible, even, you'd want to examine the anchor listing for this item in your MasterPartsPlan (Ctrl-F10-->S-->type-the-target-characters-->hit Enter).
To be sure, we have long had contextual cross-links between some of these venues, so that with an easy click from one you can instantly see what another has to show in regard to the same part (if in the MasterPartsPlan, for example, a Ctrl-Right/Click will direct-open the InventoryControl form's view of quantities for that item at each location; and, vice versa, if in the InventoryControl form a Ctrl-Click on an item will instantly open its anchor listing from within the MasterPartsPlan). Regardless, there has been no simple, "one-stop-shopping" method via which to instantly find everything ServiceDesk has to tell you about all its dealings with any particular part number.
Recently, a client (Ray from AAA Appliance in Plano, TX -- what is it with these Texas guys?) all but insisted we provide this, and it seemed like a reasonable idea.
The new feature is accessed from within the PartsCrossover form, via a simple button (shortcut access is Shift-F8-->G). Here is what the new button looks like:
You may either use the shortcut above-descried, or click with your mouse. Either way, a dialog box will ask for your search target. You may type as much or as little of the part number of interest as you wish. In response, the system will automatically open all relevant searches for you, and display the results.
Optional/Added Part Numbers Now Have Operational Validity:
This is one we should have done a long time ago. We so much should have done it long ago, it's quite embarrassing it has only been done at this late date.
In the inventory system, each stocking line-item has an attached Supplemental-Info form. In the MasterPartsPlan (Ctrl-F10), you can display this form by clicking in the green band, just to the right of each line-item. In the InventoryControl form (F10), a simple click on most listings will display it. Within the form there is a section for listing up to five alternate part numbers. These are alternates that may potentially be used in addition to the two, in-column alternates that can be created within the face of each line-item (those base-level alternates are identified as IndustryNumber and OtherNumber). Thus, you may store up to eight different part numbers, as connected with a single line-item. But there has long been a difference between the base-level alternates (only two) versus the five Supplemental-Info alternates. The latter have not been included in any of the as-you-type searches, and therefore have had very limited usefulness.
That oversight is corrected with this release.
Now, when your system rebuilds the underlying index that enables as-you-type identification of stocking line-items, it will include in its index build all of the alternate numbers you have listed in Supplemental-Info. So, when you go type any of those in a contextually-applicable context (including your techs in SD-Mobile), you'll see references as needed:
Picking an alternate reference will select the core, underlying line-item, just as you'd otherwise expect. I am sorry we were not quicker with this obviously-logical improvement.
Added User Fields Now Available for Customized CyberOffice Emails, and Two-New Customizations Now Available:
In November of last year we added significantly to the set of CyberOffice-connected emails where you may customize the text to more perfectly fit your own particular preference, taste and circumstances (see entry in this blog accompanying Rel. 4.7.63). Each of the emails involved can use from among a particular set of fields, where actual/particular text replaces a mere placeholder in the customized text (e.g., "We are reminding you about your appointment scheduled for [Appointment]."). In general, we made available to your customized text only the particular and same fields as were used in our canned/default text. It turns out, in some of these emails, some of you wanted to use other fields. This release adds significantly to the list of fields available in each of the potential customizations.
For details, please see pages 18 through 23 in the CyberOffice Handbook.
Additionally, we have added two new items, to the list of auto-sent emails where you may customize the text, as opposed to using our direct canned text. In fact, I believe with these two additions all auto-sent emails are now subject to potential customization.
The first item that is newly subject to potential customization is the Survey-Invitation, as sent my SD-MobileLink. This particular email is something of an oddity in that, while its functionality is indeed part of the CyberOffice suite of services, it's in fact the MobileLink program that does the actual sending. The reason is, mechanically, it simply works out better that way.
The second item is an email that's also sent by the MobileLink program, but it's actual Mobile function. It's sending of the e-ticket to the customer.
Instructions on how to do the work for these newly-customizable items is likewise found in the CyberOffice Handbook, but on page 24. It may seem odd that we've placed instructions there, for how to do customizations for emails as sent by SD-MobileLink. We simply thought it would be easiest for you if all auto-send email customization instructions were in one place.
Incidentally, for these last two customizations to be possible, you must update your copy of SD-MobileLink to at least Ver. 2.0.15 or above.
Twice as Many Zones May be Deployed (Now 60, as Opposed to 30):
Though it's a rare situation, a very few clients have wanted to divide their territories into more than 30 zones (30 is the max quantity of divisions that has prior been accommodated for). With this release, you can now make up to 60 zones.
The change involves more than just restructuring elements within ServiceDesk. Because they are involved in zone/availability management with third parties, each of the DispatchLink utilities (SBDL, SPDL and LGDL) also had to be updated with ability to manage the increased quantity of zones. So did the SD-CyberLink utility, for its uploading of availability information for your own customer's online scheduling. Updates have been posted on all of these, in addition to the update on ServiceDesk itself. It's important, if you choose now to setup with more than 30 zones, that -- in addition to updating ServiceDesk -- you also update any such utility you may be running.
As an incidental byproduct of updating all these utilities, each has also been updated with internal wherewithal to inform the ServiceDesk's new "Command View" of its running state (a feature announced in the last-preceding-update entry).
Other DispatchLink Utility Improvements:
A couple of releases back, we added an option in SB-DispatchLink (SBDL) that changes how holdbacks are calculated. For clarity, holdbacks refer to the practice of withholding portions of your availability from exposure to the third-parties these utilities link to. The general idea is that, typically, you do not want third-party-administrators and/or OEM-warranty clients to hog all your available capacity, and thereby leave you with no room left for your own more profitable COD work. So, the DispatchLink utilities have long had a couple of parameters you can set to "hold-back" a percentage or quantity of slots within each scheduling pocket. This holdback method was somewhat blunt, so earlier this year we added a far more sophisticated method (see entry below dated 1/7/14) that lets you far more finely specify holdbacks -- in particular, as specific to individual zones and days of week.
Anyhow, for either situation the holdbacks have been designed to apply to the quantity of slots you had remaining for a given scheduling pocket (i.e., allocation minus present burden), rather than to the raw allocation. One of our users provided some good arguments for why it would be better (at least for certain situations, such as his) for the holdback specification to apply against raw allocation instead. So, there's now an option in each of the utilities to apply instead on that basis. For example, in SBDL it looks like this:
Other ZoneScheduler Improvements:
While overhauling our within-SD ZoneScheduler interface
(Shift-F5) to accommodate more zones, we made some incidental GUI
improvements. Most notably, if you have ServiceDesk itself
expanded when the ZoneScheduler form is opened, the ZoneScheduler
interface itself will expand to take advantage of the enlarged available
space. This may be particularly useful if you decide to setup with
a very-large quantity of zones such as is now available.
New "Command View" Offered from the About ServiceDesk form:
If your office has more than just one ServiceDesk station, you may find yourself wanting to know (and perhaps monitor) what systems are turned on and running at other stations. This is particularly true if your office is running multiple utilities, such as SD-MobileLink and/or SD-CyberLink, for example, or any of several others. Until now, there has been no way to directly monitor this, except by checking directly at other stations to see what is running there. Now we have a method.
To use the new method, go to your About ServiceDesk form (it's the first option under File Functions in the main menu, or a handy keyboard shortcut is Shift/Ctrl-A). There, you can simply move mousepointer over the textual area that indicates when the Auto-Archive last ran:
In response, there will be an immediate pop-up, looking something like this:
To put it another way, this method is similar to invoking a Windows ToolTip (i.e., float your mousepointer over something), though this is a more elaborate ToolTip than is typically the case.
As you can see, this one provides a ton of potential information regarding what's running within your system, and where, and how currently.
The current release of ServiceDesk is configured so that each instance posts more information (regarding what is turned on and where), than before, so as to make more such information available here (where posts were done in older versions, the information as available to show you will be more limited, as in the case above regarding the WipAlert feature being turned on at the desk of Karie Spaet).
Also, each of the relevant utilities must be updated to do their own postings of information, for showing in this report (in other words, until and unless you are running a utility that has received this updating, it will not do the posting that's needed for this report to see its information). We will be updating each of these utilities, for this purpose, within the next following few days.
New Option to Omit the Offer to Reschedule, within the Online Confirm-Appointment Interface:
This one was driven by some servicers wanting to improve their metrics as measured by certain third-parties, such as Whirlpool. Among other measures of concern are days-between-dispatch-and-first appointment, and days-between-dispatch-and-completion. The direct matter of concern is, when you make it easy for a consumer to reschedule, they tend to do so with more frequency than otherwise.
So, say on Monday you get a third-party dispatch that's scheduled for two-days hence (i.e., Wednesday). If you in fact fulfill that appointment on Wednesday, it will be fairly good for your metrics. But suppose on Tuesday you use the SD/CyberOffice feature to email the consumer a reminder, with request to click on hyperlink to confirm they will be there on Wednesday. Your consumer gets the email, clicks on the hyperlink, and sees this as the interface:
Your consumer sees the offered re-schedule button and thinks: "Ahhh, maybe it would be more convenient to pick another date." So, he or she clicks on the button, and picks a date two weeks out. Now, because of that one incident, your metrics are caused to significantly suffer (I was going to type "shot to hell," but we should not use that kind of language in a professional blog).
So as to make this kind of scenario less likely, we were asked to make an option to eliminate the reschedule button. We figured most people will likely want to maintain the button for COD customers, so we configured the new option, within Settings form, as follows:
As you can see, you are basically allowed to have the Re-Schedule button taken away for all your jobs as associated with High Volume Clients (aka "HVCs," these are the parties for whom you have setup QuickEntryTemplates, and for whom you have created two- or three-letter HVC abbreviations within their templates).
If you wish to use this feature, just go to your Settings form (Ctrl-F1), and invoke the sub-settings window for appointment reminders by clickong on this button:
Then, check the indicated checkbox option (i.e., as illustrated two items above). In result, the confirmations interface as seen by your consumers (specifically, those where the paying party is setup as a High Volume Client, and for all invitations as sent after you've made this change) will look like this:
We hope you like it.
Pre-Screening Jobs: Improved Mode of Review and Check-Off:
It's not the same world it once was -- at least so far as concerns appliance service (apologies are repeated here, for those of you who work in other industries, for the fact our focus predominates on appliance service). It used to be you could stock just a few hundred parts on a truck, and it was sufficient to produce a high rate of first-time completions. Not any more. Because manufacturers now use so many specialized operative parts, the only way to get a good first-time-completion rate is by advance-examining each job -- before the tech goes out -- and seeking on such basis to advance supply him with such parts as the symptoms suggest he may likely need. Most service companies refer to this as "pre-screening." Borrowing from the medical field, a few others refer to the process as "triage."
It was way back in '05 when we were first asked to add programming elements into ServiceDesk to specifically accommodate triage. It should be noted, in this regard, any need for special treatment of actual parts, as involved in triage, relates solely to transfers from inventory (i.e., pulling items from a storeroom shelf, for the tech to take with him), as opposed to special-order parts. For the latter (i.e., where you choose to special-order a part without first having a tech's on-site diagnosis proving need), the standard ordering mechanisms work just as perfectly as otherwise. For pulling items from inventory, on the other hand (and specifically as connected with triage), standard mechanisms do not work so well. There are a few reasons:
-
Unlike special-order items, inventory items are not normally (i.e., absent some special system otherwise) tagged to a job. Thus, absent some new and added mechanism, there was no way to know on the day of an appointment that the tech needed to be taking a pre-screened-for-the-job inventory item with him.
-
Though the inventory system could nevertheless be used to simply transfer a pre-screened item from office to the tech (i.e., so he'd then have it with him when going), there was formerly no system to flag, if the tech ended up not using the part, that it now needed to be retrieved back from him.
-
Even the above assumes you can reliably predict which tech will be fulfilling an appointment. This is often not true, and even if you have fairly definite plans, they can change (say the intended tech gets sick). This makes any advance transfer, of a pre-screened-I-think-it-might-be needed part, problematic regardless.
-
Another factor is you might end up needing a pre-transferred part elsewhere (e.g., for an across-the-counter sale). It would make better sense to have it still in the office and available for such immediate use, as opposed to sitting in a tech's inventory waiting the day of an appointment on which it might be used.
Based on these factors, we created what we affectionately call "Speculative Parts Tagging" (a sub-part of which has sometimes been referred to as the "Anticipatory Parts Transfer"). The system was primitive at first, but has been augmented many times since, so that today it is reasonably robust.
At least, in and of itself, it has been pretty good. Where it has lacked is regarding the larger environment in which it lives. Specifically, we have not had any very good mechanism to facilitate having a particular person in the office know which jobs are due for pre-screening (i.e., just providing a simple on-screen venue in which to easily iterate through those particular jobs), and to readily distinguish those from ones that have been pre-screened. It's a need that exists, indeed, whether your pre-screening results in spec-tagging from inventory, or special-ordering items that were not prior in inventory. Either way, a good context of selective review makes excellent sense. In its absence, folks have improvised with existing tools, though none have been been perfect for the purpose.
We have had sort of a tool (a poor one, but a tool nonetheless). Introduced in 2010, this mechanism involved a then-new check-off symbol in the DispatchMap (where every appointment always has some particular check-off status). To indicate any particular appointment has been pre-screened, we made it so you can there toggle its check-off status to the CR symbol, as illustrated here:
For at least some, this provision allowed the DispatchMap's roster of jobs to function as a workable pre-screening (let-me-see-the-jobs-that-need-it, and distinguish-from-those-that-do-not) venue. For most users, however, it has not been ideal. As but one of its shortcomings, it's really a job that needs to be pre-screened, as opposed to the appointment for a job. There are many others, but I'll not review them further except to say: I have described this old triage environment for the sake of providing context for introducing what's new. In a nutshell, the tool as just described was formerly the only purpose-provided tool we had for this need. Now, we have created something far better.
As mentioned, it is much more a job that needs pre-screened, rather any particular appointment for a job. Hence, the ServiceDesk JobRecord form (F7) now has a new control. In default mode, you'll see it looks like this:
If you click on it, you'll get a dialog like this:
If you answer "Yes," the new control will change to look something like this (with particulars as apt, of course, to the circumstance):
There will also be a notation, automatically added to the JobRecord's narrative history, similar to this:
Thus, each JobRecord can now readily show on its face whether it's been pre-screened (and, even more, by whom and when). And, it's permanently in the history. This latter is important because, if need should arise, you can also toggle a job back out of pre-screened status (via method, dialog and results similar to as above-described, though opposite in effect):
To clarify, this method is intended to supersede use of the CR-symbol-check-off within the DispatchMap (at least as a mode for providing an optimized venue for conducting the pre-screening process). Even so, we have not removed those symbols from relevance in the DispatchMap. In particular, when you make an appointment for any job, its check-off status will automatically be set equal to whatever is the pre-screened status of the underlying job. Additionally, when you change the pre-screened status of a job, the system will reach out, find any pending appointments as belong to that job, and change their check-off statuses to match (assuming they have not advanced to any check-off stage beyond the CR symbol, in which case they'll be left unaltered). The general purpose is so you will continue to have pre-screen check-off visibility within the DispatchMap, though the real venue of operation has moved from there into, more specifically, the JobRecord environment.
So, all this is pretty good, even excellent -- except something more is needed.
What is that something more?
Very simply, you need a convenient and powerful venue from which to review solely those JobRecords that have not yet been pre-screened. You need this, to accommodate the process of doing the pre-screening on those particular jobs. In other words, you need an optimized triage venue.
With one added enhancement, our wonderful JobsPerusal form (Shift-F7) now fits this bill perfectly.
Formerly, the bottom-right corner of the JobsPerusal form had these exclusion options:
Now, there is a new one, as shown here:
So, there it is. All your pre-screen person must do is go to the JobsPerusal form (again, Shift-F7), pick any other inclusion-or-exclusion filters in which he or she is interested, then "check" this new filter option. He will then be shown solely those jobs on which the pre-screen process is still pending (assuming, of course, he has prior checked-off all that have prior been pre-screened). As he then goes through each such item in what is effectively a "needing-pre-screen" queue, and does the needed work, he'll check-off each item, and thereby gradually reduce the queue to none (and it will remain as none, of course, until others in the office add new jobs into it).
Honestly, we think it's pretty ideal. We think you're going to love it.
New Method for Managing Expectation for Above-1 JobCount Values on Upcoming Appointments:
A job is in waiting status (perhaps waiting for parts to arrive, for the customer to return from a vacation, or whatever else is the case). You know that eventually you'll be making an appointment for the tech to fulfill, and you know this new appointment must have some particular JobCount value greater than 1
How do you assure that, when it's time to make the appointment, you remember to insert this greater-than-1 JobCount?
Or, imagine another scenario.
You had an appointment with a greater-than-1 JobCount, and for whatever reason it was canceled. You know it's going to be re-scheduled. How do you assure that the re-scheduled appointment gets the correct, above-1 JobCount value?
Until this release, ServiceDesk has not had a truly magnificent system to assist you with this. Now it does.
At its most basic, this new system depends on a specialized kind of AttentionNote (most folks call these "sticky notes;" they are the little-yellow electronic notes that can be added into a JobRecord). For a long time, there's been another particular kind of AttentionNote, called a "JobLink." The purpose of this kind is to associate jobs one to another (see entry here accompanying Rel. 4.1.123). Now we introduce a second kind of particular such note. What makes both kinds "particular" is that, based on very specific internal text, ServiceDesk knows to react in special ways, based on their presence.
Naturally, there was already a method by which to create the JobLink specie of AttentionNote. To accommodate this new particular specie, we have simply expanded on that method.
More specifically, in an F7 JobRecord form there has long been a button on which you may click to create a standard (you-type-in-what-you-want) kind of AttentionNote. There has also long been a slight variation on this button. Since introduction of the JobLink specialized kind of note, there has been the option to do a right-click instead of a simple left-click on that button (or, if preferring shortcut keys, the alternate command is Ctrl-E as opposed to the standard, left-click-mimicking Alt-E). There is also a reminder ToolTip for this variation, as you'll see by floating your mousepointer over the button. Prior to this release, such mouse-pointer floating would produce this:
Now, it instead produces this:
It's not a lot different, but as you can see the ToolTip now suggests there will now be more options than just one, when you choose this alternate method for invoking the button click. Indeed, the right-click option would formerly have taken you directly to the dialog to produce reciprocal JobLinks. Now, it will instead produce this:
As you can see, it now produces a choice between the old (and formerly only-offered) option, versus instead choosing the particular new option, that we are now talking about.
When you choose that new option, you'll get a dialog like this:
And when you enter your desired-for-next-appointment JobCount value, ServiceDesk will insert an AttentionNote to the JobRecord similar to this (this is, specifically, the result you'd see if indicating the next appointment should have a JobCount value equal to 3):
Now you may wonder, with that note there, does it simply provide you with a reminder -- that you must personally pay attention to when making the next appointment?
No, it's much more helpful than that.
When you go to create an appointment for any job, ServiceDesk will now on its own accord look to see if any such AttentionNote (i.e., with text precisely as per above, though the actual number can vary) exists. If so, it says to itself: "Aha, this appointment should have a JobCount value of X." Upon so concluding, ServiceDesk will auto-insert that value for you, into the new appointment (of course, you remain free to edit differently if desired). And, upon creation of that new appointment, it also automatically deletes the AttentionNote for you (it's done it's job, after all, and should no longer be needed).
That's the basic functionality -- though behind-the-scenes it gets a little more complex for some situations.
To illustrate why, suppose your customer cancels an appointment that has an other-than-1 JobCount value (something came up, and there's intent to reschedule in the future). If this occurs, ServiceDesk will behind-the-scenes automatically create a new, specialized AttentionNote to assure the next appointment appropriately gets the same other-than-1 JobCount value as the one being canceled. At least, it will do this for a normal cancelation. However, suppose you indicate that the appointment you are deleting was simply an erroneous entry. In that case, the system figures it better make sure of what's needed, and presents you with a dialog like this:
Another somewhat tricky situation arises when you decide to change an existing appointment, and if one of those specialized JobCount AttentionNotes is present, and with a value that does not correspond with what's in your being-edited appointment. How should the system respond to this situation. Since it's unclear, it will present you with another dialog, as follows:
If you are wondering, BTW, yes, this new functionality also works when your customers self-schedule online (via SD-CyberOffice) for any return visit. The SD-CyberLink utility will look for these same specialized AttentionNotes, and upon seeing any will assign the needed JobCount value to any relevant appointment as online-created (though you must be updated to at least the now-current release of SD-CyberLink to make this happen).
If you are further wondering, yes, this new power also translates into interaction via SD-Mobile. More specifically, a particular section in the tech's Mobile PVR page has been changed . . .
| From This . . . | To This (new/added function highlighted): |
 |
 |
As you can see, there is now explicit provision for the tech to indicate the JobCount value as needed for his next visit.
By way of distinction, this new facility applies, in particular, to the situation where your tech is leaving it up to the office to schedule his anticipated return -- as opposed to using other facilities that exist within Mobile for doing his own direct-booking. This latter situation has long been covered, so far as JobCounts are concerned, for the facility that allows direct-booking lets the tech directly-specify a desired JobCount for the appointment he is himself creating -- and that count goes right in, directly, to the actual appointment that results. It's only where he is leaving it up to the office, to re-book (and for an appointment that will not yet exist), that a concern has existed. And that is, of course, where this new facility (as above shown) comes into play.
Where the tech uses this new facility to indicate any JobCount value other than 1, SD-MobileLink will automatically create that new specie of AttentionNote, within the applicable JobRecord, as it downloads and processes the tech's PVR (concurrent releases of both SD-Mobile and SD-MobileLink, or higher, are required to enable this added functionality).
All in all, we think you'll love this new feature. We hope you'll take advantage of it.
One more thing (and if you're wondering), yes, if it's to be operative, the text as inserted to the AttentionNote must be in exactly the form ServiceDesk creates it, when you use this option. If you were to manually type exactly the same text, it would indeed work just the same. However, if your text was even one character different, it would not work the same.
Improved Prompting to Read About New Features:
We have two different online WorkDiaries: one for ServiceDesk and another for the SD-Mobile system (we likely should have added WorkDiaries to chronicle and explain new features in other products, but, to date, there are only those two).
We very much want you to read the new entries in these, as you update and have available the new features that are explained. It's been somewhat tough to get most people to do this. Initially, we added a little dialog in the update sequences that offered to open the applicable diary for you (i.e., the one for ServiceDesk if that's what you're updating, or the one for Mobile if you're updating either SD-Mobile or SD-MobileLink). We found most people did not read still, so we changed the dialogs. They no longer offered a choice, and simply opened the diary pages for you (except with ServiceDesk you could choose to do it before or after you downloaded the update). This also proved to be not very effective. The applicable diary would open, and most people simply ignored it. For many, it was more a nuisance than a help.
So, enter Phase 3.
Now (and we really hope this is what makes a difference), you will not be invited to open and read the online Diary unless, in fact, it contains a new entry that's pertinent to the version you have updated to. And, you will no longer be denied a choice. However, the system will, once in each run session, continue to invite you to read an applicable diary entry, until you consent to at least let it open for you. Once you do this, it will not pester you again until and unless there is, in fact, a new entry posted that you have not yet opened to.
We hope this proves to be better.
Of course, if you were one of those that never responded by reading, you'd not likely be seeing this posting either. c'est la vie!
Added Visibility for WP-Measured Average-Days-to-Completion:
For those of you doing Whirlpool work, we understand there's a recent renewed emphasis on certain metrics -- one of them being the average of days between dispatch and job completion. We have long given you a number of insights into this.
For example, F11-->C-->Q will produce a report (it's called the "Quality of Service" report) that, for each high-volume-client (including WP-Warranty and/or WP-Contract service, as applicable) will indicate several figures, including quantity of days from first visit to completion (not quite the same as from dispatch from completion, but useful nonetheless).
Similarly, F11-->C--P will produce a report (called "Performance Metrics") that's specifically tailored to, as near as possible, match several of Whirlpool's own focused metrics, including separation between average days to completion on jobs with-parts (and this is indeed from dispatch to completion), versus average on jobs without-parts. But, it will only show such indications based on specification of the underlying client, and not on basis of whether it's a job (regardless of client, and regardless of whether it was COD or not) that was dispatched to you by Whirlpool.
Still another relevant report can be navigated to via F11-->T-->M (its called the "Percent of Completions" report). It's also an excellent resource. Among other meaty morsels of info, it indicates average number of days from first visit to completion. Again this is different from average of days from dispatch to completion, but (and, more seriously, so far as the desired metric is concerned) the breakdown has divisions via techs, rather than via dispatching entity.
So, though all the above provide a rich resource set, none was quite the
perfect fit some of you have desired. Based on this, we have now
augmented the "Checking Data" export as provided appurtenant to the last
above-described report (look for the "Export Check Data" button that
appears after the report displays). That export formerly had just
five data fields. It now has 13, including an indication of
whether each applicable job was dispatched to you by Whirlpool
(and regardless of whether it was COD or otherwise). If you run
the report then produce the export, we think you'll find the added
fields provide a great deal of raw data -- which you are free to
manipulate (this is rather easy in Excel) for whatever analytical
purposes as may suit you.
In-Process, Explicit Warning Re Applicable SSA:
The Special Situations Advisory (SSA) is designed to let you make a unique record, as applicable to a particular customer or address, involving some special situation as applicable to that customer or address (e.g., he's deadbeat, do not perform service for this person). Whenever you are in a Callsheet and type in a name, address, telephone number or email that matches an applicable SSA item, you'll see references to that item (along with other references in the CstmrDbase showing). These will be distinguished by the fact there are # signs in the line listing.
Until now, it's been up to the user to visually notice such a listing, and volitionally click on it, to then review and take into account whatever is disclosed in the item. The problem is, a user might fail to notice, or may not bother to volitionally review. There was desire for the software to more directly "force" the user to notice. That's what this improvement is about.
When a user clicks to "Job/Sale" from a Callsheet, the system now checks for either a name or address match in the list of SSA items. If there is a match, the user gets a message similar to this:
After being shown the SSA as applicable (and then closing it), they'll
then get this:
Beefed-Up Multi-Tech PartsPick Export:
A while back we added an option to export from the PartsPick form (Shift-Ctrl/F8) a summary of items needing moved for a particular tech (see entry below for Rel. 4.7.47; we added a button in the form's bottom-right corner). Thereafter another user wanted the ability to do similarly, but for all techs, and via a single click for all. For this (and though the addition was not then here announced), we added a button to the form's bottom-left corner):
This new button was thus significantly powerful, but still left some movements to be managed separately. Specifically, its output accounted only the for the same items as directly managed via the PartsPick form, which by nature deals with moving special-order parts and spec-tagged inventory, but does not account for simple and standard inventory restock.
That's what is addressed in this release.
Output from this button will now include not just what's shown to be moved on the face of the PartsPick form. It will also include what needs to be moved to the tech, by way of simple inventory restock. More specifically, it will show what needs to be moved based on the Items-Recently-Used method.
Additionally, when simple inventory restock is used from this venue, it
will do one better than when using the same method via the
InventoryControl form (F10). In that form, there is at
present no built-in mechanism by which the system remembers for you what
was the last time you ran the process (and which, therefore, should be
the "begin-date" for movements that trigger the next-new process).
Here in this context, the system explicitly remembers the last date and
time, and offers it as default for the current process.
Augmented Intelligence on Exposing Availability:
This is a big one.
It's one of the items that, from the page's inception, has been in in our "Vote on Project Priorities" webpage (go to my.rossware.net, and pick this option to see votes and cast yours). It's the first project-item from that list to be fulfilled (a few other big ones are pending fulfillment very soon).
In a nutshell, this item/project involves the fact that where you are exposing scheduling availability to third-parties (e.g., to ServiceBench via the SBDL utility, to ServicePower via the SPDL utility, etc.), there is a natural preference to "hold back" some of your capacity for your own COD-scheduling purposes. After all, it is much better to harness your techs' capacity doing higher-paid COD work, as opposed to less profitable warranty and or contract-service work.
Since the DispatchLink utilities were first built, they have included an option to direct-specify how much availability you wish to hold-back from exposure/offering, to the entities involved. However, these settings have been relatively "stupid," in the sense that whatever holdback value as is specified applies across-the-board, to all zones, all time-segments and all dates. This across-the-board holdback scheme has really failed to adequately address need. It's not only because you might prefer different holdbacks for different zones and/or different time-segments; even more seriously, scheduling availability is a little bit like fruit: you grow more anxious to use it up as its expiration grows nearer.
To state the above another way, if you're looking at a date ten days out, you may estimate there's a good chance you will be able to self-fill 60 percent of its capacity via your own-scheduled COD jobs. Thus, for a date that distance out, you may want to holdback 60 percent of your availability, from exposure to third-parties. But consider a date just five days out. If you have not by now filled 60 percent of that date's capacity (and with your own jobs), you may estimate it as less likely you will manage to do so, and may welcome more jobs from third-parties to help fill the vacancies. Hence, you might want to reduce your holdbacks to 40 percent. Now consider a date just one day out (i.e., tomorrow). If tomorrow's vacancies are not otherwise filled, you may welcome any jobs (even if from third parties) that can manage to fully harness your resources. So, for tomorrow, it's possible you will want to set your holdbacks at zero.
The bottom-line is that, in the real world, intelligence dictates reserving more for dates further out, and reserving less for dates closer in (and likely according to some sliding scale).
As mentioned, until now, our holdback schemes had no basis via which to incorporate such intelligence. Now they do.
If you go to ServiceDesk's ZonePlanner interface (Shift-F5-->then click on the "Show Planner" button), you will see it now has a new settings section:
With the default/standard option selected there, the interface shows and works just as it has historically. If you select the second and new option, however, the area where you could prior alter capacities for particular calendar dates changes from something similar to this (varies somewhat depending on your setup):
To this:
As you can see, it's setup to allow you to specify holdback values individually, for each and every scheduling cell (i.e., zone-and-time-segment combination) -- and according to quantity of days out, varying from today and stretching to two weeks distant. If you float your mousepointer over, you'll see there are ToolTips to guide you in more particulars.
Most specifically, if you place a whole-number in any cell, the system will then holdback that discrete quantity from your indicated capacity otherwise, specifically as concerns any offering to applicable third-parties.
Example: Suppose in a given scheduling pocket you have allocated a capacity of 10, and for the same pocket you indicate a holdback (as applicable for the relevant quantity of days out) of 3. It means, so far as offering pocket-relevant scheduling slots to third-parties for that slot, the system will figure capacity is 7 (10 minus 3). Thus, if the actual burden scheduled is, say, just 5, the system will offer 2 slots available (7 minus 2). But if the actual burden scheduled is 7 or more, it will offer 0 slots.
In the alternative to placing a whole-number in any slot, you may instead place a decimal-fraction. A decimal-fraction is any number that is greater than 0 but less than 1 (e.g., .2, .37, .9). It is a mathematically perfect way to dictate a percent when applied mathematically (i.e., .2=20%, .37=37%, .9=90%). Use this method if, instead of wanting to holdback a discrete quantity, you instead wish to holdback a particular percent.
Example: Consider the same scheduling pocket as above described. If we indicated a desired holdback of .3 (as opposed to 3) exactly the same result would obtain, so long as capacity was precisely 10 (.3 of 10 = 3). But what if capacity was instead set at 12. A holdback of 3 (whole number method) would remain a holdback of 3. A holdback of .3, however, would now result in effectively holding back 4 (.3 times 12 = 3.6, which rounds to 4).
Depending on circumstances, you may find the whole-number method more effective for your purpose, or the percent method. Each is provided so you can choose whichever fits best.
At this moment, just one of the DispatchLink utilities has been updated to use the values as may now be created via the the above-described (and just-now augmented) SD interface. It's SBDL (aka SB-DispatchLink). We will update others in the near future.
Within each such utility, the ability to use the old (comparatively "stupid") method will persist, and control, until and unless you create one or more non-zero settings within the new SD interface. What happens, essentially, is the utility will look for any non-zero values there. If it finds even one, it will say to itself: "Aha, we're using the intelligent holdback method." Based on this, it will change modes. Instead of using its own ("stupid") settings, it will use what you have created in your SD-ZonePlanner interface.
To make it appparent which basis it is using, SBDL (Ver. 4.5.55 and forward; other utilities again to follow) will change its interface slightly. Specifically, so long as you have checked the option to upload availability, it will change the section where you'd otherwise specify un-augmented/"stupid" holdbacks from within it, from this:
to this:
As you can see, the section is disabled and semi-blanked -- so as to make it visually obvious it is having no controlling effect. Again, you will not see this until (and unless) you have specified one or more non-zero holdback values from within SD (and unless you've updated to a utility that incorporates the improvement; for SBDL it's Ver. 4.5.55 or above).
New Functionality Option in SB-DispatchLink Ver. 4.5.53):
This new option relates to Flowing-Pipes, those instruments that allow unused capacity in one zone to be accessible for use in another (for details see the FlowingPipes-Handbook). Potentially, these pipes can be confusing. They allow excess burden in a "flow-from" zone to effectively move into the unused capacity of a "flow-to" zone. What is potentially confusing is that, as burden flows in one direction, capacity consequentially travels in the opposite. The thing you must remember is that any such pipe in itself points in the direction of burden flow. If you keep this well in mind (and remember that capacity moves oppositely) you should be in good shape to avoid the kind of confusion that easily results otherwise.
Anyhow (and in regard to our new feature option), it turns some of our users had found it useful to put all capacity into one of more flow-to zones, and zero capacity in a particular flow-from zone. Logically, they expected that the capacity of the flow-to zones would effectively transfer back into the flow-from zone. This indeed worked just fine so long as the flow-from zone was setup with a capacity of at least 1. If setup with 0, however, it did not work. It turns out the reason for this is we'd coded in some logic governing the potential flows. It essentially said: "If the user has specified zero capacity for this zone, that indicates a definite no, and we should not allow any effective flow of capacity back into it. But, for some users pursing a particular strategy, that's not the logic they wanted.
Hence, this new option is now added:
As you can see, the descriptive text is tiny, so as to fit within the space available. Unabbreviated, it reads:
"0-allocated zones show available if flow-tos have capacity"
If you leave the option unchecked, the system will behave the same as it has historically. If you check it, it will allow any unused capacity from a flow-to zone to effectively fill-in to flow-from zone, even if it's otherwise allocated as having zero capacity.
Generalized Overhaul and Improvement in ZoneScheduler Form:
Often folks are anxious to verify that SB-DispatchLink (and similar utilities, such SP-DispatchLink, LG-DispatchLink, and so on) are uploading correct dispatch-availability info to the third-parties involved. Generally, this can be done quite readily by online review via the third-party's provided interface, to see what availability values have resulted there, then comparing to what's shown within SD's ZoneScheduler form (Shift-F5). With but minor exception, this has worked quite well.
However, there have long been certain machinations, with availability, which the DispatchLink utilities perform (along with SD-CyberOffice, for the purpose of exposing scheduling availability to your own direct customers), which SD's internal ZoneScheduler did not.
For example, the utilities have each long been programmed to automatically do a burden flow between time-segments within a given zone-and-date-pocket. To illustrate, suppose for a given zone-and-date pocket you've allocated 5 slots for morning, 5 for afternoon, and 10 for all-day. Suppose you've actually booked 9 for morning, 8 for afternoon, and 4 for all-day. Technically, you are now overbooked for total capacity (9+8+4=21, which exceeds the summed capacity of 20 as achieved by adding capacities of 5+5+10=20). If a utility was to consider only the afternoon segment, it would conclude you still have 6 all-day slots available, and would then upload that. Obviously, it would not be a good result for you. To prevent that, the utilities are coded to flow excess burden from one time-segment (within any given zone-and-date pocket) into any unused capacity of another.
Somewhat similarly (albeit with a somewhat opposite result), imagine the same capacity setup as above described, but where you've ended up with burdens of 13 all-day appointments, against 2 for morning and 1 for afternoon. In that circumstance, you still have overall capacity of 4 (20-minus(13+2+1)). If no behind-the-scenes adjustment was made, this capacity would be offered exclusively in the morning and afternoon categories (since you're already overbooked on your all-day allocation). But that's not good. You'd rather have folks choose all-day, if they are willing. Given this preference, the system is coded to see where (in such scenario) you have availability across the spectrum of time segments overall (even if not for all-day specifically) and, in such a case, artificially notch up all-day availability to 1, hoping that is the category a consumer will select.
Anyhow, these kinds of machinations were not being managed within SD's own Shift-5 ZoneScheduler form, and it sometimes resulted in confusion when folks sought to reconcile what they were seeing there with what they were seeing (and after an applicable utility uploaded) via online review with an applicable third-party. Particularly because we'd just added an option to accommodate further machination on the utility side, we decided we should upgrade SD's ZoneScheduler form so that it might with greater precision show what is expected to be uploaded to third parties.
While we were at it, we made a plethora of other improvements.
The upper-right-hand corner of the form has been changed as follows:
| Old | New |
 |
 |
We have highlighted the changed area to focus on. The general idea is, previously you could check the provided option and see the graphs change to show the result of your own-created zone-to-zone flowing pipes. Now you may check another option to show the result of time-segment-to-time-segment flows (as above-described), and/or a third option to see where exposed availability will be notched up, in a scheduling pocket, based on availability in associated pockets (again, see above for explanation). You will also find if float your mousepointer over any of these areas, a ToolTip will appear with further explanation. All of it is so you can more particularly judge what is being exposed to others via various online mechanisms.
In regard to such better-seeing, we have also added a new row of numbers in the display, as here shown:
As you can see, this row does the math to indicate remaining availability in each applicable pocket. More particular, if you enable the options to allow the same internal machinations as the DispatchLink utilities perform, this row of numbers should show the very same values as are uploaded by those utilities (i.e., no more confusion).
And there's more.
If you've setup one or more zone-to-zone flowing pipes, do you ever struggle to remember (as you look at this ZoneScheduler interface) which pipes you've setup, running from which zone to which zone, and in what direction? We figured there should be a graphic to assist you, in this regard. (In fact, we'd planned to create it when this form was first envisioned and created back in 2002, but we never got around to creating it until now.)
Now (and finally), the pipes become graphically real.
I just now took a moment, and setup pipes from zone 1 to 2, from 5 to 3 and from 5 to 7. Then, I re-displayed my ZoneScheduler form. Look at what it now displays:
See those new pipe graphics? Aren't they cool!
BTW, the overburden in Zone 1 (as seen immediately above) shows as such because I did not have the option checked to show the result of flowing-pipes. Look how it changes when I check that option:
To be clear, that particular option-to-show-flow has long existed. However, with benefit of the pipe-graphic, it is now much more contextually obvious what is occurring, plus you have immediate, visual verification if you have setup your FlowingPipes.txt file as per end-result wanted.
One other matter is, where applicable, there will now be an indication of whatever job-counts you have assigned to Zone-0 ShopJobs (for more details on the underlying method, see entry regarding Rel. 4.5.68).
Aside from these very functional improvements, the interface has been improved aesthetically. The colors are now much more refined. The form more properly fills its space. There is more vertical space above the "Max Load" line in which an overfilled graph can fully display, before intruding beyond available space. Overall, we think you'll find it to be a much more enjoyable interface to use.
Fix for Duplicated Past Appointments:
In Ver. 4.7.67 I'd made an improvement to guard against a just-discovered vulnerability that could, potentially, result in an occasional loss of an appointment in an office that has multiple users simultaneously working in appointments (such small, behind-the-scenes improvements as that one are not generally announced here; indeed, for every more noteworthy improvement as here announced there are twenty or more that receive no official notice).
Anyway, it turned out there was a flaw in how that improvement was made, and it resulted in appointments for past days (as viewed when you PageUp in the DispatchMap) duplicating. In fact, after each night's archive they'd duplicate again -- so, for a date, say, five days ago, you'd end up showing five instances of each appointment.
This release includes a procedure that will fix those duplications. To run the procedure, open your DispatchMap, and on your keyboard hit Shift-Ctrl-Alt/R (the "R" is for "R"emove duplicates). Just follow the prompts, and the procedure will fix your data.
Generalized Print/Export from F8 PartsProcess Form:
The main concept for working within the F8 form is to do work on-screen. Given this, the primary print or file-output options we've had, there, have been as intended for provision to others (e.g., when ordering parts and needing to provide order info to the vendor). There has also been provision to print labels for parts. And, if wanted, it has forever been true you can print what's presently shown on the screen by using SD's universal "Print-what's-shown" command, which is Ctrl-P. However, there has been no provision for doing a complete output (whether to printer or a file) of all items that fit within the presently-selected display category. That is the option now added. It is accessed via Alt-P, and shows as an option in the contextual CheatSheet:
Added Option in the New "Warn-If-Expected-Part-Arrival-Is-Too-Late-For-Appointment" Feature:
Sometimes I receive a nasty reward for having created an awesome new feature. It is someone responding with: "Oh yeah, we love that, but now you must make an option for us to do it differently."
It happened with the new feature described just two items below. In creating that feature, we assumed you need to be receiving a part at least the day prior to appointment date. Turns out this is not true for some operations. In particular, there are some that have their parts vendor managing parts for them (indeed, filing each tech's tote before a messenger delivers to the tech's residence, on a daily basis). The ETA for any part that's put into the F8 screen is the date they expect the vendor to be populating the tech's tote with that part. So, for this situation, it's perfectly fine if the date-of-arrival on the part is the same as the appointment date.
Given the above, we now have a new Settings option in the F8-form's Cheat-Sheet (right-click in any non-operative space of the form to get its Cheat-Sheet), as follows:
| picking this Cheat-Sheet option | produces this settings dialog |
 |
 |
The result of this option setting is, we think, self-explanatory. However, if not clear, it's this. With the second setting (which is default) you'll be warned if an appointment is the same date as ETA on the part, or sooner. With the first setting, you will only be warned if appointment is sooner than the part's ETA.
For Serialized-Inventory and POS Operation, Improved Auto-Fill Link-to-SalesJournal Entry:
If you use SD-Dealer for managing serialized inventory (and SD's POS system to conduct sales of such inventory), you may have lamented the fact that, when linking from there to make a sales journal entry, the system did not separate your serialized-inventory sales into the "Merchandise" category of sales. Instead, it would place the value into the "Parts" category, along with any other line items from the ticket. That is now corrected (turns out it had formerly been coded to appropriately separate out merchandise, but without us realizing it that element of functionality was broken when we upgraded another matter, quite a long while back).
Improved Treatment of S.Call Categorization in Mobile FinishedForm, Including its Auto-Fill Link-to-SalesJournal Entry:
When we designed the ticket format for use in SD-Mobile, we strived for a layout that would be useable across a very broad range of charge-structure preferences. This was needed because, for the Mobile context, it is far less practical to provide a structure that allows for infinite user customization of the ticket, such as we do within ServiceDesk itself. One element, in seeking to allow such breadth of use, is the ticket was not designed with inclusion of a box labeled "Service Call." Instead, we made a box labeled "Labor" and a box labeled "Other." We figured this would allow a reasonable fit for both those companies that refrain from charging a separate "Service-Call"-labeled fee, and for those that do (where it can simply be placed in the "Other" field.
By and by, however, we had requests from folks who wondered if we could program an option where, with a simple settings change, that "Other" field could have it's label changed to say "S. Call" instead. We assented and created the option. It's in the MobileLink program, as shown here:
But, we only programmed to make the option effective within SD-Mobile itself. Nothing was changed within ServiceDesk. In consequence, SD's FinishedForm-context representation of the Mobile ticket continued to show a "Labor" field and an "Other" field, even if you checked the option above shown.
That is changed in this release (i.e., now SD's FinishedForm-context representation of the Mobile ticket will comply with the option you set above). There is another element of change that is perhaps even more important.
When you link from the FinishedForm context to an auto-filled sales journal entry, there must be a translation from which boxes are filed-in on the particular FinishedForm you're linking from, to which fields are populated in the sales journal entry. For going from the Mobile ticket, we've had it programmed so that both "Labor" and "Other" are summed together -- into the Labor category of the sales journal entry line. The reason is because we did not know whether "Other" was used as a service call, or for something else.
However, now that we are bringing into the Mobile/FinishedForm context information about whether that "Other" field is being used, explicitly, as ServiceCall field, we can so handle it. Specifically, if you've picked that option, the system will now translate that box into the sales journal entry's ServiceCall field, just as you'd expect.
Automatic Warning on Whirlpool Core Returns:
In cooperation with Whirlpool, we are now keeping your system up-to-date with a current list of all the parts that involve a core charge. Interactions within ServiceDesk and SD-Mobile will automatically warn when your work involves such a part. The only thing you must to do activate this is consent when asked for permission to install the list (this will occur for appliance servicers only; if you are in another field of service, the prompt will not occur).
For Whirlpool warranty servicers, there is another
feature that works in conjunction with the above. If you are using
a part that Whirlpool would like to receive back as part of its Quality
Assurance program, you'll be prompted accordingly.
Better Management of Processes as Connected with Ordering Pre-Screened Parts, Including a New CyberOffice Transaction Scenario:
More and more companies are pre-screening their jobs to assure a likelihood the tech will have all needed parts with him on the first trip. In many instances this means ordering parts before ever going out. In some instances the appointment has already been made, and you may find -- upon going to order a pre-screened part -- its arrival is not expected until after the appointment date. To cope with this dynamic means doing several things:
-
As you order each such part, you must look to see if there is an appointment already pending, and, if so, whether the expected arrival on the part squares well with that appointment date.
-
If the anticipated arrival on the part is not sufficiently soon for the appointment, you must call the customer, explain the situation, and ask to cancel the present appointment.
-
You must then actually do the appointment cancellation within ServiceDesk.
-
You must reschedule for a new appointment date (either at the time, or later when the part arrives).
Another factor arises from the fact that ServiceBench is now often including pre-screen part suggestions in its dispatches. The SBDL program places these into a Callsheet's ExtraNotes (which are of course transferred to the resulting JobRecord), meaning (to take good advantage):
-
You must make a special effort to be on the lookout for these notes, and, upon finding them, you must make significant effort to process accordingly.
We have done several things to aid your work, in meeting these imperatives:
-
We have changed the F8 form's right-click on job reference action. Formerly, this would quick-link to the underlying Parts-Request record. It now instead direct-links to parent JobRecord.
This is to make it much more rapid and intuitive to see all the details as offered by the underlying Job. -
If there is a pending appointment for any job that underlies an F8 PartsProcess item, a ToolTip will appear for that item as you float your mousepointer over either it's left-most reference area, or over the DateExpected area. The ToolTip's color will be green if there is no apparent conflict between the ExpectedDate and appointment date, or red if there is a conflict:
This is to make it so you don't even have to check the underlying JobRecord, so as to know about pending appointments -- and so you have a more obvious visual reminder if in fact there's an issue. -
When you insert an expected date in an F8 item's ExpectedDate box, the system will behind-the-scenes check to see if there is a conflicting appointment. If it finds a conflict, it will present you with the following dialog box:
At least the above is what you'll see if the underlying JobRecord has no email address for the customer. If it has one, you'll see this instead:
Either way, so long as you are appropriately populating that ExpectedDate box, you don't have to be deliberately watching. The system will volitionally inform you of a conflict between expected part arrival and appointment, regardless. -
In the latter case above (i.e., where the JobRecord includes an email address for the customer), you'll notice the first option offers to cancel the appointment for you, plus email the customer with notice of the cancellation, and to include within the email a hyperlink on which the customer is asked to click, for the purpose of scheduling a new appointment (this one, of course, needing to be after the expected arrival date of the part). To do all of the above is as easy as picking that selection. You need do no separate work to achieve the actual cancellation within ServiceDesk (it's taken care of for you, and appropriately documented within the JobRecord's narrative history, too). You need do no separate work to inform the customer. Very likely, you need do no separate work even to get the job re-scheduled, for the customer will likely do it via the email-included hyperlink.
-
The feature as just described involves our new CyberOffice scenario -- specifically, an invitation for the customer to re-schedule a new appointment, via online interface, when the existing one is cancelled. We're labeling this one Scenario 12. It's pretty simple. When the customer clicks on the email-provided hyperlink, it takes him or her to the scheduling machinery as embedded within your website as part of the CyberOffice system (for this transaction it is particularly configured to refrain from offering any dates that precede the day after you expect to have the part). When the new appointment is made, it plugs automatically back into ServiceDesk, just as do other appointments.
-
As you can see, the second option in the above dialog offers to do all that was just discussed, but does not include a hyperlink to accommodate immediate re-scheduling by the customer. If you are not yet using CyberOffice, you can fully use this option regardless. Or, in some instances, you may prefer to use it if you simply do not want to re-schedule until after the part arrives.
-
Regarding pre-screen information that comes from ServiceBench in an SBDL-inserted dispatch, ServiceDesk will now look for such items when you do the Job/Sale transition from Callsheet to JobRecord. If it sees such an item, it will present you with this dialog:
With your consent in this dialog, ServiceDesk then opens the underlying ExtraNotes. As you can see here, when you float you mousepointer over the portion that describes the "PRE-ID" item, a ToolTip informs you of a wonderful new shortcut:
Just as the yellow ToolTip invites, you may do a simple Ctrl-Click on the "PRE-ID" text. In response, the system will open a PartsRequest-creation window for you, where you can then instantly initiate the process. We feel this should make it so you no longer need to engage in the deliberate effort to go looking for these "PRE-ID" notes, and it facilitates more easily going from the PRE-ID'd item to the actual order creation.
New Text-Customizations Available for CyberOffice Emails as Sent by
ServiceDesk:
The CyberOffice system incorporates a variety of emails that are generated by either ServiceDesk or SD-Cyberlink to automate (or in some instances semi-automate) communication with your customers. In each instance, we have formulated text for these emails that we judge as suitable for the purpose. Occasionally, people want their text to be different, so we have long provided the ability to setup for use of your own custom text in substitution for our "pre-canned" variety. But, this customization ability has extended only to some emails, not all. This release adds several to the list of emails that may be customized.
Emails that have long been customizable include: (1) acknowledgment of an initial order-request as sent by SD-CyberLink; (2) acknowledgement of confirmations, as sent by SD-CyberLink; (3) request to confirm appointment with provided hyperlink (so the customer can confirm online), as sent by ServiceDesk; and (4) request to confirm appointment by email reply or return call, as sent by ServiceDesk.
With this release we add to our "customizable" list the following: (5) emails as sent by ServiceDesk to request initial scheduling on a job (typically involved when service was ordered by a third-party-payer) and with provided hyperlink (so the consumer can do such scheduling online); (6) email as sent by ServiceDesk, as per above, but without provided hyperlink (meaning the consumer must respond by calling the office to schedule); (7) emails as sent by ServiceDesk to inform parts have arrived, with hyperink-provided for the customer to schedule a new appointment; and (8) emails as sent by ServiceDesk to inform parts have arrived, but without a hyperlink (meaning the consumer must respond by calling the office to schedule).
In addition to the above, the two new email scenarios (as discussed in the section above) also have their emails setup as customizable: (9) emails as sent by ServiceDesk to inform of appointment cancellation, with request to reschedule via provided hyperlink; and (10) emails as sent by ServiceDesk to inform of appointment cancellation, with description of intent to re-contact for scheduling after the parts arrive.
The CyberOffice Handbook has been updated to better describe, overall, how to create and implement your own customized text (it has very nice tables now, shows you the default text, etc.). Besides that general improvement, if of course has details as needed for each of the newly customizable contexts:
http://rossware.net/MiniManuals/CyberOfficeHandBook.pdf
To go directly to the topic, please see pages 18 through 23 of the above-referenced document.
"Hlpng"-Type Appointments are Now Appropriately Handled in the CyberOffice
Appointment-Confirmation System:
If you do not know what a "Hlpng"-type appointment is, you should. They are for where you need to send one or more added techs to the same appointment. The primary/lead tech should be assigned the appointment as per normal. Any other tech that you want to send simultaneously should also get an appointment, but with a tiny twist. In place of the customer's name, you should place the precise text "Hlpng" (an obvious abbreviation for the word "Helping"). Typically, you'll follow with a space and then a name or abbreviation-for the tech who's lead on the appointment (as in "Hlpng GR").
These "Hlpng"-type appointments have been a fixture in ServiceDesk since virtually the beginning, and work great. Both ServiceDesk and SD-Mobile know to treat appointments in an appropriately-different fashion, when seeing that "Hlpng" expression in lieu of the customer's name.
Recently, though, a user pointed out one place where we'd not programmed to sensibly account for the difference. He told me when a customer cancels an appointment via the CyberOffice confirmation process, it's only the main appointment that's cancelled. Any potentially-appurtenant "Hlpng" items remain un-cancelled. On investigation, I found it was worse than that. ServiceDesk itself was not screening to avoid extra confirmation requests when "Hlpng"-type appointments were involved. In consequence, the customer could receive a confirmation request on the main appointment, plus further request for any "Hlpng"-type appointment add-ons.
And it wasn't merely an issue on cancellations. Ideally, the consumer should be able to confirm or reschedule on the main appointment only, and have any of those actions transfer to all "Hlpng"-type appurtenant appointments (i.e., it was not a concern solely within cancellations). This likewise was not being done. Clearly, a fix was needed.
This release does all of that. ServiceDesk will now refrain from sending confirmation requests on "Hlpng"-type appointments. More than that, in conjunction with the main appointment it will upload new data to the online CyberOffice data. This new data will indicate the identity of any "Hlpng"-type appointments as associated with the main one. With such data present, the SD-CyberLink utility can now see what appointments are appurtenant, and -- whatever action the user does on the main appointment (whether confirming, cancelling or re-scheduling) -- it can apply the same result to all (this requires an update to SD-CyberLink as well, Ver. 4.5.33 and above will have this improvement).
Improved the DispatchMap's Automated Time-Frame-Insertion Function:
It's possible you don't know about this feature. If it's your office's practice to leave many or most appointments at "all-day" status until working out each tech's route the day before, and if it's further your offices's practice to then convert appointments from all-day to smaller time-frames (so the customer can be informed and not have to plan on potentially waiting at home all day), this feature is for you.
In a nutshell, with a simple action in the DispatchMap (a Ctrl-Click on the tech's name at top of his list of jobs) this feature inserts time-frames for you, using sensible logic according to parameters you specify. It is very much easier and quicker than doing it manually.
Until this release, however, there was a limitation. The feature was designed with expectation it would be working with a list of appointments that all began with all-day status. Thus, if you had some in the list that were already specified for a smaller time-frame, it would balk.
This release addresses that. Now, you may optionally tell the system to simply bypass any appointments that already have a time-frame.
Better Avoidance of Overbooking in SB-DispatchLink:
Several months back we added a feature in SBDL whereby it optionally uploads appointment changes to ServiceBench. This seems to have had an unintended consequence -- in particular, such consequences would potentially arise if yours is an office that engages in the every-afternoon ritual as above-described (i.e., changing tomorrow's appointments from all-day to smaller time-frames as you get the routes worked out). What was evidently happening is as follows:
Say, around 3 or 4:00 in the afternoon, you assign time-frames to a bunch of jobs that were formerly all-day. SBDL dutifully uploads these changes. ServiceBench's machinery then sees the changes, and, accordingly, changes its tally of which availability category each was tallied against. They were tallied against All-Days. Now they are tallied against either Morning or afternoon. Until the next update cycle, this opens up vacancies (formerly filled) in the All-Day category, and suddenly you get a rush of new dispatches as pushed through that momentary opening.
Ver. 4.5.51 of SBDL (available for update now) patches that vulnerability.
A Little Aid on Warranty Claims:
ServiceBench and other warranty processors all require that electronically-submitted claims be configured to fit a particular format, which each uniquely defines for their own exclusive purpose. These formats specify a series of "fields." Each field is essentially a "fill-in" space that expects a particular element of data to be contained within it. Among such fields is one called "WarrantyType."
Historically, this field was used to indicate whether the claim was for "Parts-Only," "Labor-Only," for "Parts and Labor" or it was a claim made under "Special Authorization" or a "Policy Adjust." In other words, this is a field that, in general, refers to circumstances as indicated by the checkboxes at top of the traditional NARDA form:
ServiceDesk has long been programmed to check the appropriate box for you, based on how other boxes within the form are populated (e.g., if you've indicated parts charges but none for labor, and if there is no special autho number provided, it checks "Parts Only" for you). It has further long been programmed to behind-the-scenes translate, when formulating the actual claim string as needed for any processor, to the particular WarrantyType-Code as fits the applicable checkbox selection.
There was a day when the above was reasonably simple. However, in the last few years it's become rather more complicated as the variety of expected WarrantyType-Codes, and variation in selection of Code as expected for circumstance, has proliferated. For example, ServiceBench now requires added codes to report COD jobs in some situations (varying still further depending on if its a referral-program-initiated COD versus otherwise), a different set of codes if the work was for Lowes, and a different set still if you are a Canadian servicer, as opposed to U.S.
As each of these complications has come to light, we have written added IQ into the portion of ServiceDesk that manages the translation, in the effort to assure the needed WarrantyType-Code is appropriately uploaded for each circumstance. Regardless, to make it always right has become rather complex, and potentially difficult to troubleshoot when a claim issue rises.
To assist in such situations, we decided a while back it might be helpful to expose the actual WarrantyType-Code-character the system was translating to (and would therefore upload as part of the claim string) in each instance. Thus, we added a little box in the NARDA's top-right corner, to so expose:
That box was also made editable -- so that, if you know you need a different code than the system is naturally inserting for you, there is opportunity for you to change to that different code.
The small enhancement that's made with this release (yes, the above was indeed much explanation for a small enhancement) is addition of a ToolTip, exposed when you float your mousepointer over the little WarrantyType box:
It tells you precisely what the code-table meaning is, for the code-character that's been inserted for you.
And there's a more substantive improvement. We
discovered a change, that we'd prior added to make certain U.S.-based
claims code as COD when needed, was reacting in an over-broad manner,
and coding some non-COD, parts-only claims as COD (which resulted in
initial rejection and need for manual online correction). That is
corrected in this release.
Fully-Modernized Auto-Dialing:
If you have not prior enjoyed the pleasure of seeing, on your computer screen, the telephone number of a person you wish to dial, and finding you may initiate that dial-out with a simple click, you have little idea how much you've missed.
It's one of those conveniences that, once you become habituated and discover how nice, intuitive plus time-and-effort-saving it is (not to mention how "right" it feels, like the kind of thing that in a modern world you simply should be able to do) -- once you've encountered all this, you'll find it's your feeling that strong men would have to drag you kicking and screaming back to the cave-man world, to ever again take you away from it.
Because this "small convenience" is nevertheless so great, it's one that's been present in ServiceDesk virtually since its inception.
However, this long-standing capacity was programmed, in those early days, to use a technology that was prevalent in those early days. Specifically, it was programmed to use a dial-up modem. You may recall, back in the days before everyone had broadband, if you wanted to connect your computer to the internet, it was done by having it equipped with what was essentially its own "telephone" (aka modem). A standard telephone cord would connect from this item's port to a standard telephone jack. Your computer would literally dial-up an internet provider, and that would be your connection to the internet.
Our long-standing method for auto-dialing (which has continued to work all these years for those implementing it, and, indeed, works still) depends on this modem. Specifically, it makes a call to that modem, telling it to go "off hook" (i.e., same as when you lift the handset on a standard telephone) and dial the number of interest. The idea is, once this dialing has been done, you then pickup your normal handset and continue in normal fashion.
This system has worked, and worked very well, for those implementing it. The problem is that implementation has not been practical for many (or in many cases as useful as it might potentially otherwise have been). There are a number of reasons:
-
Many offices have phone systems where the jacks as provided to each station are other than standard phone-system jacks (dial-up modems require standard phone-system jacks). In other words, for many offices the jacks talk to some central and proprietary box, and via some protocol other than standard telephone-system language (aka POTS, stands for "plain old telephone system").
-
Even where a POTS jack is available at each desk (or even a particular desk where the feature is particularly desired), it will in most cases be direct attached to a particular POTS line. If that line happens to be otherwise busy when the user wishes to auto-dial (perhaps in use by someone else in the office), it means that same line is not then available for auto-dialing purposes.
-
KSU and PBX based phone systems (which otherwise use POTS lines for at least their connection out to the larger world) may not detect when a particular, direct-modem-connected POTS line has gone off-hook. This makes it less obvious when a modem has completed the auto-dial and should be user picked up, or that another user should not simultaneously pickup, etc.
-
VOIP/SIP based phone systems do not have POTS lines underlying them at all. For these, there are no POTS connections available for a modem to connect into at all (at least absent installation of special-added hardware).
-
Today's computers are no longer standard-equipped with dial-up modems -- meaning, if you wanted to use this old method for auto-dialing, it's an add-on extra accessory you'd have to acquire and attach to your computer.
The combination of these factors has made it more the exception than the rule, where our users have taken advantage of ServiceDesk's otherwise-wonderful auto-dial capability. We've long wanted to address that, and with this release we finally have.
Our fully-modernized auto-dial feature allows you to use TAPI.
What is TAPI?
It stands for "Telephone Applications Programming Interface." It's a technology (or set of protocols, methods and Windows capabilities) designed to facilitate communication between applications running within Windows and any phone system that is connected to and "talking" to your local network of computers (aka local area network, or LAN). At least, it's designed to facilitate such communication with virtually any such system.
What do I mean when saying "virtually any?" Essentially, your phone system must be TAPI-compliant, meaning its manufacturer designed it with ability to communicate and respond to requests under TAPI standards. Almost all "systems" as manufactured in the last ten to 15 years have in fact been so designed, so if you have a "system," chances are very high it has this capability.
Notice I have also emphasized the word "system." Why? If you have a set of multi-line phones that connect directly to POTS lines (again, ordinary, direct to phone company connections), it is not a "system" in the sense I mean it. At the least, a true "system" puts some kind of proprietary box (often called a KSU or PBX) between you and the phone company's standard set of incoming lines. If you've made the transition to VOIP (likely using SIP as your local protocol), your system does not connect to phone company at all (or at least does not via standard POTS modalities). It may run off a dedicated "black box" or via software in a PC. As long as it is so centralized (i.e., something more than, say, a Magic Jack) it is likewise a "system."
If you have any such a "system" (and if it's connected or can be connected to your LAN) you can almost certainly use our new, modernized auto-dial feature -- and easily, too. In most instances (this will depend on your particular system) it will not even require added hardware. It will certainly require no other connections to the computers in your office (i.e., auto-dialing from each will work through the standard network/Ethernet connection they already have setup).
It is up to you and your telephone system provider to first assure each station (at least each where you want this feature to operate) is setup to properly TAPI-communicate with your phone system. Once that is done, there is but one, very simple element of setup to be done in ServiceDesk. Go to the Settings form (Ctrl-F1) from each applicable station, and in the modem-setting box select "TAPI"
That's it. Really. It's no more complex than that. Once you've done this, ServiceDesk is fully ready to do TAPI-based auto-dials.
It can be done from virtually any SD location where there is a box designated for a telephone number (e.g., Callsheets, JobRecords, Rolodex, etc.). Generally, from such a box, you can either right-click or double-click (for any who do not know, "double-click" always refers to the left mouse button). It can also be done (this is another new element with this release) from any hyperlink-enabled box (e.g., the Description box in a Callsheet or JobRecord, the History box in a JobRecord, etc.) if you double-click on a telephone-number as otherwise free-form-text found within that box.
When you invoke any such auto-dial request, you'll instantly see the auto-dial window:
and, simultaneously, the TAPI request will go forth. I suspect the exact following response may vary somewhat depending on the particular phone systems. When I use the feature in our office's VOIP/SIP system, my extension immediately rings, telling me to pickup the handset or headset (or perhaps the speakerphone, as a third alternative). When I do, the auto-dial window automatically retires, and I find myself then on the line listening to the ring confirmation of the completing call. It's like magic, and is virtually immediate.
I wish I could shout very loudly my urge for you to implement this ASAP. Assuming you have a phone system that is compatible (or that can be made compatible), you'll find it is SO WONDERFUL. It's the way the modern world should work. There that telephone number is, in front of you and on the computer screen, already existing in data form. Why in the heck should you have to read that number with human eyeballs, translate through the wet matter of your brain, think through the sequence of digits then manually punch them onto a pad. That's stupid. The right, sensible and modern way is to effortlessly click on the number, and it just dials. It's how it should be, and how it will be once you assure the underlying setup is in place for your phone system.
In regard to the setup work as needed for your phone system (this is entirely outside ServiceDesk), there are three things you must assure:
-
Your phone system must be connected to your LAN (it's just a standard network-cord connection, like any other), and must be ready to respond to TAPI requests.
-
Each station (at least each where you want the feature to be operational) must have an appropriate TAPI-driver installed in its Windows\System32 folder. This is sort of a micro-app that directly manages communication between Windows and your phone system. Much like a printer driver is particular to a printer, this driver is particular to your phone system, and will generally be obtained from your phone system provider.
-
The Windows "Phone and Modem" setup, at each such station, must be configured to appropriately access the above-described driver.
The above-described elements of setup are not part of your ServiceDesk support. It is between you and your phone system provider to assure they are properly secured. As an easy test to assure you've obtained success, in this regard, we suggest you use the built-in Windows Dialer. It's a phone-dialing utility present in virtually all Windows versions (click on Start, Run and type "Dialer"). If this utility connects to and dials out through your phone system, it means you've setup correctly, and we can virtually guarantee SD's auto-dialer will work with equal perfection.
Please understand if you cannot succeed with this basic Windows test, it is with your phone system provider where you should seek support, and not Rossware. If you can succeed with this basic test, and still have trouble, then of course come to us. So that you know, the first thing we'll do, if you come to us, is test that Dialer. It it works with your phone system, yet you're having an issue using the feature within ServiceDesk, it will definitely be our problem to solve. If it does not work, we'll insist you go back to your phone system provider for the needed assistance.
By the way, if you do not have a phone system (i.e.,
you're using one or more phones, multi-line or otherwise, that connect
directly to standard phone system jacks), we recommend auto-dialing just
as highly (you are simply in the category of folks that could have been
doing it rather easily all along). You can buy modems to add to
your computers at less than $15 a piece (just Google to find them).
Setup is easy. You'll love it.
Rolodex Export:
Ever want to take the ServiceDesk Rolodex (F4) with you? There's a new button for the purpose:
What it does is create a simple document that
summaries the data out of your Rolodex. It's essentially the same
document that is now, by default, made available to your techs using
SD-Mobile. If wanted, you can make an alternate, edited copy of
same for them. For details, see the SDM-WorkDiary.
"Discount" Button Added to POS:
This is an item that's been slow in coming -- in the particular sense that a couple of users have been requesting it for a very long time. To those users, I am sorry it took so long.
Anyhow, it's now here.
In any of the FinishedForm formats (Alt-F4), a tiny new button will be visible in the box that totals the parts boxes. From the POS form itself, for example:
If you wish to add a discount to your ticket, click on the button. It will query as to the desired discount percent (defaults the first time at ".15" for a 15 percent discount, and will default all subsequent times to whatever you picked the prior time). In response, the system will on the bottom parts-listing line insert a discount line item, describing the discount and inserting its amount:
If you edit other parts-listing line items after this insertion, the insertion will remain unaffected. This means, if you want to update the insertion, you'll need to click on the Discount button once again (essentially, it will re-calculate and re-insert the discount, based on whatever is now the otherwise totaled amount of parts-item listings). This item can also be removed (just as can any other parts-item listing) by right-clicking on it.
Improved Insertion of Work-Performed in Finished-Forms:
Recently a user pointed out that, where ServiceDesk reads in a JobRecord's history to assemble a description of the tech's work and insert it into a FinishedForm (particularly and especially into the NARDA, as needed for warranty claims), it was sometimes including text that really was not needed (and in some instances very much not wanted). Especially not wanted were recitations of money collected.
Indeed, we've learned significant resources are in some cases being expended by humans, to manually edit what it's fully possible, instead, to code for machine editing.
This release provides such improved machine editing. Any money-collected recitations, at the least, you should now find are auto-removed for you. If you find there are other elements you would similarly like to see better machine-edited, please let us know.
File-Export Option Added for PartsPick from DispatchMap:
Two releases back (see notes accompanying Rel. 4.7.47), we added a file-export option for PartsPick data as assembled via the PartsPick (Shift-Ctrl/F8) form. This was based on a direct client request.
Turns out, it was not the context where the export was truly wanted. It was wanted, instead, in the much-older context for assembling PartsPick data, which is one of the "Send-To-Tech" options available from within the DispatchMap (F5, to get this option in general, right-click on a tech's name, at the heading of his list of jobs there). Grudgingly, we now offer the option in this context too (both efforts involved a lot of coding work).
More specifically, it's offered when you use the alternate "Send-To-Tech" method -- the one as provided to invoke a "Send-To-Tech" option, but for all techs (i.e., as opposed to just one, whose name you otherwise clicked on). This method is invoked from the DispatchMap via the shortcut-sequence Alt-P-->D-->P. At such point the PrinterSelect dialog comes up, and you simply need to choose for the output to go to file, rather than the printer:
If you're curious, a major difference between the two PartsPick contexts is the older one (from the DispatchMap) was designed to simply to provide a list of what needs moved to the tech. It provides no means to simultaneously tell the system what movements you are (or are not) making. It also does not indicate items that need to be received back from the tech. Overall, the much-newer PartsPick form is far more powerful -- though each may have their particular place, depending on your mode of operation.
Enhancements for Clients on RSS:
RSS is our acronym for Rossware Server Solutions. It's the option where you can pay us to host a server for you, which makes it easy for each of your office personnel to log into ServiceDesk from any computer at any location. It's still a reasonably new offering, and we are still learning to tweak things in its regard. Until now, we have not tweaked elements directly in ServiceDesk. Recently, we realized a need.
First (and as you may know), if you're not actively running the SD-Backup program, ServiceDesk makes rather a pest of itself in seeking to persuade you it ought to be done. This, and all the pester elements we engineer, are done for your ultimate benefit -- based on what we've seen users suffer, by not doing things they ought to.
Regardless, RSS users do not need to be running SD-Backup. It's because the RSS system itself provides its own very robust backup elements, so others are not needed. Thus, such pestering in the RSS context made no sense. This release fixes that.
Another little change is, when RSS clients now connect for assistance, we'll be direct-alerted to the fact you're an RSS user. This will, in many cases, help to better direct our efforts (there have been cases, if you wish to know, where we're helping an RSS client with some issue in SD; we conclude the problem is "in the environment," and tell the user they need to take it up with their IT provider; oops, it's us).
"Department-Assigned" Added to the "Jumbo" Parts Label:
This is one that will likely interest only a very few, but if you have the need, you'll like it. If you use the Departmentalization feature, and if you'd like the underlying-assigned department to be listed on parts labels, it will now happen if you pick the "Jumbo" style Dymo label.
Upgraded SP-DispatchLink (Ver. 4.3.54):
Over the
years, a great deal of sophistication had been added into SBDL (stands
for SB-DispatchLink; it's our integration utility for ServiceBench) --
in particular for how it figures uploading of availability.
Among
such elements is a function slightly akin to "flowing-pipes," but it
happens without any setup by the user, and is between day-segments
instead of between zones.
Example:
Suppose that for a given zone you have allotted 5 jobs for morning, 5 for
afternoon, and 5 for all-day. On a particular day, you've
scheduled 9 for morning, 8 for the afternoon, and zero for all-day.
Thus, you have 17 total total bookings against 15 allocations.
Obviously, you're overbooked. SBDL has long been smart enough
(just as is the "All" view from within the SD's ZonePlanner form) to see
such overbooking, and to refrain from offering availability for any
segment (even though, essentially, you have zero all-days booked against
allocation of five slots, meaning, looking at that segment alone, it
might appear you should have five slots open there). Essentially,
where one day-segment area is overbooked, SBDL "flows" that "overbookingness"
(nice word, eh?) into another segment area. This is but an
example. We've added a number of similarly-sensible IQ elements.
Until this now-announced release of SPDL (stands for SP-Dispatchlink; it's our SBDL-equivalent utility for ServicePower), the latter did not possess this and a few similar elements of enhanced IQ. In other words, SPDL would, for the described example, look simply at the fact you've allocated five for all-day, you have zero scheduled for all-day, and would therefore offer five all-days as currently open).
Why was such added IQ not formerly there?
These added IQ elements were added into SBDL gradually over time, as (from experience) we realized various needs. Until recently, nothing jogged our realization that the same needed to be done in SPDL. Just about as soon as that realization came (it was last week), we brought it up to par.
Why was there formerly nothing to jog our realization?
Until recently, the online availability review, at ServicePower, was knowingly erroneous, so far as its ability to accurately reflect true availability values uploaded. Because of this, there was no easy/direct way for users to verify if values as uploaded were a good reflection of what they wanted uploaded, and to inform us if otherwise.
Regardless of explanation, if
you are using SPDL, please update it at once. You'll have better
availability-upload results.
Added QuickPic-Viewing Accommodation:
Recently we were troubleshooting for some users where, upon picking a QuickPic photo to view, the system indicates inability to download the picture. This is evidently caused by security elements in the user's system, which in some instances can be rather challenging to overcome. Sometimes, when you come up against a wall, it's better to go around, rather than to insist on going through.
Our solution in this instance is to offer an alternate mode of viewing.
By default, SD's QuickPic viewer first downloads the requested photo, then opens it in whatever installed application you have designated, within your Windows setup, to open .jpg files (typically this is some kind of photo-viewer app, such as Windows Photo Viewer). But, as my dad used to say, there's more than one way to skin a cat.
An alternate way to view most photos (including those of jpeg variety) is, simply, within your web browser (e.g., Internet Explorer, FireFox, Chrome, etc.). This is our method around the wall.
If something in your system stops the default method of QuickPic download (or if, perhaps, you simply prefer to view in your web-browser as opposed to a picture viewer), you can change from the default. The method is to simply right click within the JobRecord's instance of the QuickPic button:
At which point you'll see a dialog that looks like this.
Simply pick your preference, and your QuickPic photos
will be presented accordingly.
New Section in "Result-on-Dispatches" Report (Evaluate Performance of Office Personnel):
In the past two or three years, we have had increasing requests for reports to help managers evaluate the performance of office personnel. It's an area we've been weak. There are a number of exports you can do from the Alt-F3 form (and, on the basis of information in those reports, do some of your own analysis). There is also the CyberOffice Survey system, which does a truly superb job of helping you evaluate how well your call-takers are doing, in terms of making your customers feel splendidly delighted. But (and in rather stark contrast to the plethora of tools we have to evaluate technicians), we've not had a lot more to help you evaluate office personnel in more concrete terms.
Paul Manning emailed a while back with a particular concept. He said he's very fond of our Result-on-Dispatches Report (F11-->T-->D), for the abundance of detailed information it provides. He further explained he thinks some of his office persons may be lagging, particularly when it comes to pre-screening jobs in the effort to assure maximum probability of first-visit-completion. He suspects, but would like real-numbers confirmation before he lets anyone go. He looked at how this report lays out comparisons between techs (in regard to several measures regarding what ultimately happens on dispatches) and wondered if there could not simply be a similarly-included insertion for office personnel (on the basis, specifically, of which particular office person performed the Job/Sale transition on each particular job).
It seemed like a rather good idea, and so is completed in this release. Here is a snippet of the now-current report, with the newly inserted lines highlighted in yellow (they will be different for your company, obviously showing a list of your personnel):
Please forgive the fact many of the actual numbers here do not show
well. I pulled from the old data from my old service company (from
way back in 2001). At such time ServiceDesk was not maintaining
all data elements in the same way it does now, by which reason this
particular showing suffers. Yours should not.
Finished-Forms Protection Against Typing Too Much Text to Fit In Printout:
Most of the forms, as available from within the FinishedForms context (Alt-F4), include one or more scrollable text boxes. By nature, these boxes allow you to put in many lines of text. Because of this, it's possible a user might put in more lines than can fit within the allotted space of the underlying form-format when printed (whereas, on-screen, it is no issue). This release adds a feature to warn if your typed text infringes into this, good-printout-threatened territory.
Specifically, where this situation occurs the system will change the background color of the scrollable box to red, and a ToolTip (little message that appears when you move your mouse over) will appear as follows:
You remain free to type more or less text as desired.
It is not a club: just an aid to help you, when you're intending to
create an actual ticket image (whether "printed" to electronic format or
actual paper) as to whether there are two many lines to ultimately fit
in that context.
Option for File-Export from PartsPick Interface:
Many months back we added an option, via a simple button, to physically print a summary of items as listed in the PartsPick interface (Shift-Cntrl/F8). Recently, a client requested ability to use essentially the same summary via an Excel or similar file-based format. That option is now added. The old Print button, which had looked simply like this:
Now looks like this instead:
When you click on it, the Printer-Select dialog box newly offers the
option to Send-to-File. If you desire it, pick that option, and
follow the prompts. It's that simple.
Updated Method for Accessing QuickPics:
Overnight, last night, we re-configured the store-method for
the rapidly growing mass of files as connected with our SD-QuickPic system.
Based on how these files are now being differently stored, the method
ServiceDesk formerly used, for showing you the pics, had to be changed.
This release has the needed change. If at this point you try to open these pics,
but from an earlier version of ServiceDesk, you'll get nothing but a blank for the
picture. If doing the same via this release or forward, by contrast,
you'll get the same perfect result as always.
New "Panning" Shortcut for DispatchMap:
Each ServiceDesk client-business has a unique DispatchMap, custom-created to fit its own service territory. Almost all are scaled such that less than the entirety can fit within a single screen view. To cope with this, the system allows you to "pan," moving the view-window to change the portion of DispatchMap that is "exposed" at any moment.
Prior to this release, there were three methods to pan. First is by using the arrow keys on your keyboard (aka "cursor" keys). Secondly, you can move your mouse to near any edge of the DispatchMap view screen, watch for the cursor to change to a move symbol, then click (has the same result as punching the same-vector arrow key on your keyboard). Thirdly, you can roll your mouse scroll wheel (from virtually any on-map position) for vertical movement, or move to the right or left edge and scroll/roll for horizontal movement.
This release introduces a fourth method. For those of you that have particularly large DispatchMaps (meaning many panning steps are required to move across the entire expanse), this new method will be particularly appreciated -- because it allows you to skip over intervening pan positions, and go directly to the position of interest.
This method uses the DispatchMap's Mini-Map Inset, which you may or may not have enabled from the Settings form. If you do not have it enabled, we suggest going to your Settings form, to turn it on:
The actual method, in the new panning feature, is simplicity itself. Just right-click within the Mini-Map at the position you want your pan/view position moved to. Your view position will move there instantly (and won't "pass Go" while on its way):
If you did not know, by the way, you can move the
Mini-Map inset itself (also, the little job-burden pie-chart) anywhere
within the view screen you wish. Just drag with your mouse to move
it.
"Alarm-Clock Plus" Function to Assure Afternoon Send-Outs of Appointment-Reminder/Confirmation-Requests:
Several people recently asked for this. They explained how, whether based on emails, robo-calls or a combination, ServiceDesk's afternoon send-outs of appointment-reminders for the next day (these include requests for the customer to confirm) have become so very valuable -- with one downside. It is sometimes they forget to initiate the process, with big loss in benefit.
What was requested, essentially, is a reminder, within ServiceDesk, providing a "kick," more or less, urging an operator to initiate the process.
For context, we have not believed it is optimum for initiation of the send-outs to be entirely automated (i.e., set to automatically occur at a certain time each day, without user involvement). It's because these reminder/requests should not go out until such point in the day when you have the next day's appointments rather fully worked out. The time at which this is accomplished can vary. Thus (and as a matter of design), we've thought it made most sense that it's regular practice, each afternoon, that someone is responsible for finalizing the next-day's roster (at least so much as is possible), then that person initiates the reminder/request send-outs.
But, if users forget to do this, it's a problem. This release presents our solution.
Our first task, in creating this solution, was to create an interface where you can indicate how you want your alarm/reminder system setup. Turns out we already had an interface for setting other appointment-confirmation preferences. It was introduced a bit more than a year ago (see notes accompanying Rel 4.5.58), and was accessed via selection from within the DispatchMap's Cheat-Sheet:
While we could have made a new settings interface for our new purpose, it seemed sensible to keep all such related settings together, but with an important change. You may notice the above explicitly notes its settings are "local" (i.e., particular to the station where set). There had been no reason for this aside from ease in programming. The new settings definitely needed to be system-wide. For this reason, we have superseded the above with a new interface. It incorporates the same three settings-options as were above available (while making them system-wide rather than merely local), and adds a much larger section for our new matter of concern. This new interface is accessed from the Settings form (Ctrl-F1), via button as shown here:
Here (with moderate annotation), is what the new interface looks like:
Please notice the old three settings preferences are on the left (all that's truly new is on the right).
As you can see, the interface allows you to setup successive reminders for up to three different persons. Part of our logic is the first person might happen to be out of the office (or maybe sleeping) on a given day. If so, the second person provides a backup. Ditto between the second and third persons.
As you can also see, there is provision for even further backup. You can set it so, if no human responds at all to alarms as potentially setup for them (by, of course, manually initiating the reminder/confirmation-request send-out), the system will indeed go ahead, and automatically initiate the send-out, entirely on its own (this is the setup that's done in that bottom area).
We suspect some users will be tempted to forego human reminders, with choice to depend entirely on automated send-outs. We'd be reluctant to take this choice, for a couple of reasons. One is it's likely optimum to initiate send-outs just as early as you are confident tomorrow's schedule is reasonably finalized. If you're at that point earlier in an afternoon, it is beneficial to do it at that earlier-in-the-afternoon point. At the same time, if you're not yet reasonably finalized, it's better to wait until you are. A trigger that's wholly timed and automated cannot produce this flexibility.
We suspect others may choose to depend entirely on the human reminders, leaving the machine-initiates option un-set. We'd be more sympathetic with this choice. However, if the machine-initiates option is set for a significantly-late time (at or after office closing hours), we believe it is arguable that it's better to have the reminder/requests go out even if automated (i.e., as opposed to not going out at all.
If it is not clear from the interface, by the way, no alarms will sound for anyone if, by the time set for that alarm (or for the computer itself to initiate a send-out, if so set), a send-out has already occurred. Thus (and to make it more clear), if person A responds by initiating the send-out, persons B and C will not be alarmed; nor will there be any automated initiation.
The actual alarm/reminder is via a box that will appear on an applicable user's screen (dings several times as it initiates), and looks like this:
This alarm will appear on the designated desk for one minute, then extinguish for one minute, then re-appear and repeat the cycle. The cycle will continue until either the send-out process initiates, or the day ends. It will not stop simply because a second or third person's alarm period arrives (though if a second or third person initiates the send-out, that will indeed stop it). If you are wondering, you can set as many or few, among the available alarms, as you wish.
You'll notice there is also a section where you can designate the particular days of the week in which the alarm-potential will be operative. There is a secondary effect in days selected. Suppose you have days set as per the default/example. You also have the computer-initiate option set to go, and on Friday no user initiates, leaving SD to initiate itself. After initiating send-outs as applicable to Saturday's roster (which may or may not be empty), SD notices Saturday is not checked for applicability of this new assure-send-out feature. Based on this, it figures it better initiate for Sunday as well, and so does so (likely no appointments for Sunday, so that may have little effect). It then notices Sunday likewise is not checked for applicability, and so self-initiates the the next day's roster, which of course is Monday's. Thus we achieve the logically-desired consequence that an auto-send as managed on Friday will actually send for appointments as scheduled for Saturday, Sunday and Monday (assuming days setup as in the example; you could setup otherwise if desired).
Please note the old settings preferences (those that prior-existed, and have been moved to the left-hand side of this new venue) will need to be reset here, if you desire other than the default settings.
We hope you enjoy this new enhancement, and make it
profitable.
Survey-Limiter Option:
If you're not using the SD-CyberOffice Survey system, you should be. Its power is awesome. The technician finishes a job (as registered within SD-Mobile), and within moments the customer is sent an email that expresses gratitude for the opportunity to be of service, and asks if the customer would not mind completing a super-quick, four-question survey (it's the "on-a-scale-from-one-to-ten,-pick-a-value" kind). The survey is designed to give you enormous information on the basis of just those few questions, plus provides an excellent opportunity for you to turn things around on those rare occasions when your customer was less than happy (an optional comments section also gives you a source for very useful and pleasing kudos).
Anyhow, among those who've implemented this survey system (and, of course, love it), some have had a little issue. In particular, it is those doing service for Whirlpool. The things is, Whirlpool does its own surveying. When customers have already been surveyed by you, then get surveyed by Whirlpool too (whose surveys are not so blessedly short and quick), there is concern some degree of annoyance might arise, causing your customer to report on the Whirlpool survey less favorably than if they'd not already answered yours.
That's where this new option comes in.
In the ServiceDesk QuickEntriesTemplate (Shift-F1, pick a client, then click on "Edit"), there is a new checkbox:
There is one more thing. You'll need to update
to the current release of SD-MobileLink (Ver. 1.4.128). Even
though the survey system is a CyberOffice feature, it happens to be the
SD-MobileLink program that sends the email invitations (it's because
it's downloading of the tech's completion PVR, an SD-MobileLink
function, that triggers such sending). Prior versions of
SD-MobileLink are not programmed to look to see if, for any given
client, you have checked the above box in ServiceDesk, and to refrain
from sending the survey in circumstances thereby made applicable.
SD-QuickPic ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !:
Yeah, this one is pretty big.
We've introduced our first smartphone app.
It's designed to harness something smartphones do particularly well: taking pictures, and forwarding them elsewhere via the internet.
For background, for sometime there has been a large and growing movement among servicers to have their techs photo-document an array of matters connected with each job. First among such elements is the model/serial plate on the machine being serviced. We have heard of numerous instances where a manufacturer claims a provided mod/ser combination is not valid, and rejects the claim. A picture is then provided, and the argument ends. Another photo purpose is to document that a machine and/or the floor on which it stands were already subject to damage, before the tech began working. There are other purposes as well.
Until now, companies that extensively use photos have implemented somewhat clumsy methods to get the photos, as taken by each tech, from the techs and into ServiceDesk. One method, for example, is to have the techs upload their pics to photobucket (an online sharing site). To make this work, the techs have to manually flag each pic to indicate which job it's involved with, and someone in the office has to go online, find all the new pics, download each, then manually attach to their applicable jobs. It's a significant amount of work. We figured we could eliminate all such extra effort -- and facilitate more pictures as well, by making the underlying processes much easier.
Enter SD-QuickPic, our new smartphone app.
For now, it's exclusive to the Android platform. We plan, ASAP, to add for the IOS platform (Apple) as well.
Here's how it works:
The tech first needs to download the app from Google's play store (same as downloading any other app into one's smartphone). He can search on the phrase "sd-quickpic" and find the app-download easily, or here's a link. Then he needs to run it. Initially, there's a place for him to put in his and your company's SD-Mobile credentials (same as within SD-Mobile itself).
The app runs, and shows him a list of his jobs as applicable to the present day. It also shows if there are prior pictures associated with the underlying machine to be serviced (i.e., the connected UIS). If so, he can click on the reference to view such prior pics.
If he wants to snap a new picture as connected to any job, he simply taps that job's reference, then snaps the picture. He can then type in a description, if wanted, and save/upload the picture.
The pics are uploaded and maintained for you on our array of servers. We've provided buttons in two places, within ServiceDesk, via which you can access these pics. The first is within the current-JobRecords form, which will provide a list of such pics as connected with that particular job:
The second is in the UnitInfo form, and will provide a list of pictures as applicable to this particular machine as represented in the loaded UIS:
There is also a new release of SD-MobileLink now available for download (Ver. 1.4.127). When creating the narrative entry in the JobHistory that results from a tech's SD-Mobile-based PVR, it will include a notation indicating if he added pictures during that visit, and this will act as a hyperlink (if double-clicked upon) to the particular pics he took on that visit.
(Small caveat: this notation will arise only where pics are snapped and uploaded before the PVR is downloaded by SD-MobileLink).
We have been working toward this offering for sometime, and are very excited to finally offer it. Naturally, there is a fee. It is only 4 cents per pic uploaded. The app itself is free.
One note: There is a bug in the latest Android release
that, on first, post-install run, fouls-up the step from picture-snap to upload.
If your tech encounters this, he should simply close and re-open the app.
It should solve the problem.
ADDENDUM: Since release earlier
today, we've discovered some instances of Android are encountering significant
operational faults. If your techs encounter this, please ask them to click
on the "Report" button. This sends information to our Android developer
that will assist him in troubleshooting.
Better Pricing from SmartParts data in Mobile -- Especially for Canadians:
Our SmartParts lookup system (as present within ServiceDesk and as a stand-alone program) has long had a feature where you can load in pricing that's particular to a specific participating parts vendor. We've invited virtually all the vendors to participate, but to date only Reliable Appliance Parts has done so. Thus (and, in present effect) you can load in pricing specific to Reliable (this is opposed to the more generic pricing that is otherwise offered).
This Reliable-pricing feature was enhanced more than a year ago when we added an option to add in Reliable-specific pricing for Canada, as opposed to the U.S.
Within SD-Mobile, we offer a selected portion of the SmartParts lookup database. It's applicable when the tech is typing a partnumber in either of the special-order boxes on the PVR page. It has lacked the Reliable-specific option that exists in ServiceDesk and in the stand-alone version of SmartParts. In other words, it offers the generic underlying price-points only (to be very clear; these are foundational prices, your own applicable markup scheme has always been allowed, regardless, to vary therefrom).
A number of Canadian users, in particular, have wanted
to have Reliable/Canada-specific pricing in the Mobile context.
That (along with Reliable-US pricing, if optionally desired) is what is
now offered. Full details are in this day's post as made in the
SDM-WorkDiary.
Improved Verbiage in Confirmation Emails and RoboCalls:
Recently a user told us his customers, on receiving an appointment confirmation request (whether by Email or RoboCall), were sometimes uncertain whether the indicated time-frame referred to AM or PM. For most indicated time-frames, the AM/PM context is obvious (who could doubt, for example, that an expectation for the tech to be there within the "12-3" time-frame refers to PM"). For some other indicated times, however, there truly is ambiguity (what is more likely the intent, for example, if the time-frame reference is "6-9"?).
We figured this should be addressed immediately, and while we were at it decided to improve the involved language overall, as relating to both the day-description and the time-frame description. Our goal was to make both descriptions more conversational in tone. Thus (and to provide some examples), time-frame descriptions have changed to convey to your customer as follows:
|
Old |
New |
|
7-10 |
between 7:00 AM and 10:00 AM |
|
9:30-12 |
between 9:30 AM and 12:00 NOON |
|
11-2 |
between 11:00 AM and 2:00 PM |
|
2:30 |
about 2:30 PM |
|
2:00 AM |
about 2:00 AM |
You might note the system is using the same AM/PM assumptions as used within SD itself, and if you want to override those assumption in your time-frame indication (as you setup the appointment), you simply need to add an explicit AM/PM designator, per standard practice.
Day-descriptions have also been changed for better conversational tone and descriptiveness:
|
Old |
New |
|
Saturday, 1/26 |
Tomorrow, Saturday the 26th |
|
Monday, 1/28 |
Monday the 28th |
|
Friday, 2/1 |
Friday, February 1 |
Please note the old notations were particularly bad for RoboCalling, for the voice-synthesizing engine would translate, for example, "Saturday, 1/6" literally as "Saturday one slash six" (in other words, this is precisely what your customer would hear). It worked, but made for a somewhat less elegant user experience. For the customer to instead hear "Tomorrow, Saturday the 26th" is obviously much better.
Please also note we've built some IQ into the language. The prefix "Tomorrow" is inserted if in fact the involved date is tomorrow, but omitted otherwise. The month reference is included if the appointment is in other than the current month, but is omitted otherwise. We think, all-in-all, it should make the interaction seem a bit more human-like, for your customer.
Some Fixes for Inclusion of Tech Picture:
Two entries back/below, you'll see where we added an
option to include the involved tech's picture in confirmation emails.
Pretty cool, but it turns out there were some circumstances where it was
not working as intended. Those flaws have been fixed with this
release.
An Alternate Look at Recalls:
For many years, we have offered two robust reports to give you an extremely solid basis to measure the rate at which your techs are doing work that results in recalls (F11-->T-->B). The two use alternate methods, either of which may be optimum for your circumstances, depending on your mode of work (please see pages 23 to 28 of our ReportsHandbook for details).
By nature, these reports are designed to flag work that was in some manner deficient, so as to result in a recall later on. Because of this, the reports by necessity must be looking at work that is at least some distance in the past (i.e., so as to have allowed time for the subsequent, "hey,-it's-still-not-working-right" requests to arise). If you try to measure this factor without allowing for sufficient such intervening time, you simply do not get a good measure. It's the nature of the beast, and given that fact it is always impossible to have a good measure of recall-avoiding performance that is very near to real time. To re-state the point, that measure can only be assessed at a moment where it's receded some distance (at least a couple of weeks) into the past.
There is, however, another measure of potential interest, and it's one Steve Blaisdell at Action Appliance called about yesterday. It's to know, simply, how many jobs within a more recent period (say last week) happened to be flagged as recalls. The key difference in this interest is we are not seeking to measure quality of earlier work (i.e., whether the earlier work led to recalls); rather, we are seeking, simply, to know how much of our current work happens to consist of the recalls themselves. To state it another way; in the traditional reports we are seeking to measure the blameworthy work, which later led to recalls. Steve wanted a measure for the later, fix-it work itself.
Though it would certainly be possible to make a dedicated report for this purpose, sometimes I can deliver a needed result faster, via a lesser means. In this case I've added a new field to the "Export Customer Data" form's "Scheduled-Jobs Report Type-1" (Alt-F3-->1). In a nutshell, you can run that export for the period of interest, then sort the result by the new field (it's the last field, and is labeled "KeyWordDsgntdAsRecall?"). This will provide a quick count of the quantity of jobs within the period that fall into such category, as compared to the quantity that do not.
If there is sufficient demand for it, we can make a dedicated report (to direct-provide these comparisons) at a later date.
Other Improvements:
As always (and as you can see by the Version-Number
changes) there have been many and miscellaneous other improvements, of a
nature that do not really require separate mention here.
Tech Pictures May Now be Included in Confirmation Emails:
Have a look:
The concept is obvious. Your customers will feel more comfortable (and even more impressed with how advanced and caring your operation is) when you provide a picture of the tech you'll be sending their way.
We have added a section in the CyberOffice Handbook which details how to add these pictures (in fact, we have done a massive updating and improvement in that handbook overall). The section which details how to add pictures for your confirmation emails begins at Page 19.
We must here provide one caveat to the instructions you'll find in the handbook. It instructs you to use your my.rosssware.net login to post the desired pics. Turns out that particular element in the my.rosssware.net interface is not yet ready. However, there's an immediate way you can upload your tech's pics. Just email each (with name format as specified in the Handbook) to techimages@rossware.net (please make sure it's only one pic per email; if you place in more than one per email it will not work; also, please assure for your filenames you follow the case-convention as specified in the main instructions).
New "Post-Completion RoboCall" Feature in SD-CyberOffice:
Several users asked for a system to automatically make RoboCalls to customers after the job is complete. There are a few different ideas as to what kind of verbiage these RoboCalls might encompass, but the major notion seems to involve something along the following lines:
"This is a message from XYZ Appliance Service, and we want to thank you for granting us the privilege to service your machine. We hope everything went superbly, and, if not, that you will please let us know so we can amend. Please also know that in the next two or three weeks you will be contacted by Whirlpool to fulfill a survey on their behalf. We hope you can view us favorably at that time."
We've made the system so you can create your own scripts for this purpose, and in fact employ different scripts depending on whether it's a COD job, or any particular third-party payer. You can also control the timing for when the calls go out.
Much as with our new tech-pics option for confirmation emails, there is also a just-added instruction set, for this feature, in our newly-revised CyberOffice Handbook. Those instructions begin at Page 16.
As another parallel, this one too has a caveat regard where the instructions tell you to use the my.rosssware.net interface. For the time-being, you must contact our Josh and ask him to add script blanks for you to there edit (soon the script blanks will be provided automatically).
SD-CyberOffice-integrated Survey System:
This is one is really big. It's really big.
While working to add documentation on the two new CyberOffice features above-described, we discovered (to our horror) we'd never made a general announcement on this awesome survey system, in spite of the fact it's been operational for almost a year. So, here is our belated announcement.
As intimated, this survey system is awesome!
The general concept is, after a tech completes a job, the system sends a thank you that incidentally asks the customer to do a very quick (it truly is very quick) online survey. The survey is based on the NetPromotorScore method, which is nearly magical in its ability to glean maximum useful information with minimal intrusion of inquiry (just four, please-rate-on-a-scale-of-one-to-ten questions). Tanner Andrews gets credit for leading us toward this method.
Benefits in using this system are enormous. It assures your customers you care. It informs you (and down to the individual level) how well both your call-takers and techs are doing in making customers happy. It gives you direct commentary from your customers (besides the four questions, there's a comments section where they may optionally type). In some instances, for example, customers will have been so impressed as to write glowing testimonials (which makes you feel good, and you can also use in ad copy). In some they will have been disappointed, and the notice as provided by their response provides an opportunity for you to turn that disappointment around.
If you're not using, you have no idea what you're missing. It really is stupendous. Start using it. You'll be glad you did.
New Rossware-MySql-Server Checking, and HyperLinks in ServiceDesk "About" Form:
Recently, as we've been working to upgrade redundancies, performance and reliability in our system of co-located servers (they provide data services for SD-CyberOffice and SD-Mobile, and are also the foundation for our hosted websites and hosted servers), we've encountered some outages. In part, these have been transitional hiccups (working toward greater reliability, the transitional state and essential learning curve have made for temporary decreased reliability).
Aside from being frantic to fix ASAP when these events have occurred, we've noted one of the main elements for stress (at least among many users) has been uncertainty as to whether the problem is on their end or ours. So (and regardless of the fact we strongly hope to avoid any further outages), we've added a mechanism to make it easy for you to tell.
Essentially, we are employing a second co-located server, that is independent, outside and separate from our main bank that's housed at a facility just a few miles from us (it's located prox 100 miles away in Portland). It continuously monitors our main bank, and will independently report on whether there is an issue. We've actually had this going for some time, so as to inform us if there's a problem (it will wake us in the middle of the night if so). Now we've made it so you can also access its information.
In the ServiceDesk "About" form (first option under "File Functions" in the Main Menu), there's a new hyperlink:
When you click on the new checking link, you'll get an immediate report, such as the following:
As you can see, it not only tells you the simple status; it also asks if you'd like to view a detailed performance report. It's an online analysis of our server performance (there's no cheating there, really), and you will likely find it interesting.
In addition to allowing you to volitionally check, we are now also employing this external-checking ability to modify the reports that are given to you when connection problems occur. Instead of the system simply telling you it's failing to talk to Rossware's server (and maybe it's a problem there or maybe it's on your end), it will first make a behind-the-scenes determination via that external monitor. If this shows it's on the Rossware server end, it will tell you so unambiguously. It will even distinguish for you if it's a scheduled-maintenance down (these do happen from time to time), or otherwise. If otherwise, it will further assure we are on the matter, just as soon as we are (which generally will be within a very few minutes of the occurrence, given systems that actively alert us).
These "Enhanced Notice" improvements are in this release of ServiceDesk, and will be in the next releases of SD-MobileLink and SD-CyberOffice.
Enhanced "Cloning" for Planned MasterPartsPlan Quantities:
In the last release (see just below) we increased the max potential quantity of specialized stocking plans from 6 to 60. Almost immediately, a related augmentation was requested.
There has long been a mechanism where you can populate quantities for any particular specialized Plan by cloning from quantities as setup under the standard Truck plan. The general idea is, you can rapidly/easily populate a foundation of plan quantities via the clone method, then refine where different quantities are particularly wanted as different for your new plan:
However, more flexibility was requested. Maybe, instead of cloning from the standard Truck plan, for example, you want to clone from a particular other specialized plan. Or perhaps, instead cloning from another Plan, you want to set your plan values according to actual inventory quantities as presently exist at a particular location.
This revision adds such flexibilities. Nothing is changed in terms of how the cloning process invokes; it's merely an enhanced dialog. Thus, when you click on the asterisk next to a Plan reference in the MasterPartsPlan's Supplemental-Info form, you'll now get this:
If you pick the first option, you'll be
presented a list of all other Stocking Plans, and allowed to choose from
any. If you pick the second, you'll be presented with a list of
all Inventory Locations, and allowed to pick from any. It's pretty
much that simple.
EUREKA!!!!
HALELUJAH!!!!
SUPREMO FANTASTICO!!!!
Increase in Quantity of Unique Stocking-Plans:
The exorbitant fanfare in the title is intended to reflect how badly some of our users have wanted this, along with the fact some have have wanted it for a very long time.
The expansion was slow in coming primarily because I envisioned it as necessarily entailing a very major overhaul (involving core re-design elements) of the complete inventory system. It's difficult to fit such a major re-work into our development agenda.
About ten days ago one of our users (Brenda at Fields Appliance) presented a very factual and convincing case which vividly demonstrated how dramatically inadequate, for their purposes, has been the 8 unique stocking-plan max that has existed to-date (standard Offc plan, standard Trk plan, plus 6 added plans). Though I'd already felt significant weight to provide the expansion, the vividness of Brenda's demonstration served to get my mind working much harder on the task. As it worked in this fashion, I managed to conjure a strategy for increasing the quantity of stock-plans available, sans any major overhaul. This made it practical to do in the short-term, rather than long-term. Hence, the improvement is offered now.
Our old ManagePlansAndLocations form (Ctrl-F10-->H-->L) looked like this (where the area on the left is used to define up to six beyond-base stocking plans):
Our reinvented form looks instead like this:
As you can see, the area where you can define add-on stocking plans is considerably changed. Even on the face of it, you can see the quantity of potential add-on plans is increased to at least 12. In fact, with use of the scroll function (you can use the standard scroll method, or the scroll wheel on you mouse will work fine too) you can create and access a full 60 (ten-times more than before). We doubt if anyone will need a larger quantity than that.
The ManagePlansAndLocations form is not the only place the change was needed. It applies as well in the Supplemental-Info window, as tied to the MasterPartsPlan interface:
| Old | New |
 |
 |
This is, of course, where you set the minimum for each stocking line item as corresponding to each of your specialized stocking plans (however many you happen to setup). Again, the scroll function allows you to access the entire array of up to 60 unique/added plans.
New Export for InventoryItemsOnOrder:
As any experienced SD user knows, we have two, rather separate systems for handling parts: the PartsProcess system for special-order parts, and the InventoryControl system for stocking parts. Each is tailored for the particular needs as applicable to its respective context, and they are very different. A major historical difference is that, while the PartsProcess system has always been designed to keep very careful track of items on order and awaiting arrival, in the InventoryControl system we historically considered this a less essential objective.
A significant departure from this laissez faire approach (in regard to inventory items on order) was created some 13 months ago (see entry accompanying Rel. 4.5.45), when we added a feature that keeps behind-the-scenes track of what's on order, and when you go to formulate a new order informs you, in regard to any item that may need to be ordered, of any order that's presently pending for that same item (again, please see the prior release notes).
As we added that enhancement, we contemplated it would be but the first step toward creating a more full-fledged, pending-PO-tracking element, as part of SD's InventoryControl system. This release provides a tiny further step.
Specifically, we've made the Inventory-Items-On data much more readily visible. Prior to this release, the only way to see such data was as it was reflected when going to place a new order via the F10 form. We've now added a simple export function, that allows you to see it in full:
We recognize this export will facilitate a somewhat
less-convenient visibility than might be optimum, and lacks any facility to edit
the actual source data as present within ServiceDesk. If users express the
need, we'll no doubt expand to such capabilities in the future. In the
meantime, a simple export like this can be created with a much smaller
programming investment than can a full-fledged (and editable) user interface.
New Fields in "Usage Rates" Report:
Tanner Andrews (Andy's Appliance Repair, Lincoln, NE) works very hard to assure he's stocking each of his trucks in the most optimum manner possible. His was among the voices that drove us to create our "Usage Rates" Report (Ctrl-F8-->U) way back in October of '08. Recently, he wanted better definition than this report has prior provided. Specifically, we wanted to easily see not merely the frequency of each part's usage for his operation as a whole: he wanted to easily see usage for each location (so as to better define which locations should sensibly be stocking which parts).
It made good sense, so we have delivered.
If you run the main report, the portion that displays onscreen will appear just the same as before. But if, after the main report is displayed, you click on this button over toward the right:
the resulting export/spreadsheet will have several new fields, not prior provided. Specifically, it will have as many more columns as you have different inventory locations. Each such new column will indicate, for each part-number/line-item listing, the quantity as used by that respective location.
The concept of including these columns may seem pretty obvious and basic (to such an extent to make it seem embarrassing they were not already there). Sometimes it takes a really smart guy like Tanner to realize where something so basic has been missed. Thank you Tanner.
New "Print" option for same content as prior available in Large/Detailed Email of Dispatches:
Based on the fact we so strongly consider SD-Mobile as the mode via which modern service offices should be dispatching jobs, we are less than anxious to keep pouring resources into updating and improving older and more legacy methods. However, we're not always good at saying no.
There are a plethora of dispatch methods that arise when, from within the DispatchMap, you click on a tech's name at the top of his list of jobs. Among these is one designed to send the tech his entire roster (including rather exhaustive associated details) in a single/large email. We purposely optimized text within this email for -- well -- the email context. Back to that list of options, there is also one designed to locally-print the tech's roster, similarly with exhaustive detail (but here optimized for printing).
Lo and behold, if there weren't some users who preferred the email formulation of contents, but wanted it in a printout, rather than an email. As we said, we're sometimes not good at saying no.
So, right on the face of the dispatch-methods menu, you may now see subtle changes in wording, to indicate our newly enhanced flexibility:
| Old | New |
 |
 |
From this point forward, when you click on the beloved "E" option, instead of simply being presented opportunity to email, you'll instead get the Printer-Select dialog box, configured to allow specification of email or printing:
It should at first default for email, which means if you want printing instead you have to check that as the alternate function.
Restoration, as Option, of Old MailList-Maker Method:
When, just two weeks ago (see entry accompanying Rel. 4.7.5), we did a complete rebuild of machinery that constructs a mailing list for you (making it dramatically more efficient), we felt very good about it. Alas, no good deed goes unpunished. It turns out the old method had one distinct virtue that did not survive the new improvement: it allowed you to directly select how far back the system would look, among completed JobRecords, for names to insert to the list.
Our old and inefficient method was conducive to that kind of selection. The new method is not. Given this, we've added a dialog, when you choose to make a MailingList (Alt-F3-->M), as follows:
So, you can now revert back to the old method, if
wanted for its one virtue.
Multiple New Functions for Auto-Integration with ServiceBench:
Yes, this venue is typically used to describe ServiceDesk-specific improvements, as opposed to those made in complimentary apps. However, since so many of you also use the SB-DispatchLink utility (SBDL), and since we've made rather significant improvements there, this seems like a suitable place to announce.
Only some three months ago we added two new elements of information that may potentially be auto-uploaded to ServiceBench, via SBDL (that time we announced via email to SBDL users): ServiceDesk JobRecord HistoryNotes and direct/separate close-transactions for completed jobs:
Since then, we've been asked for three more additions to our SB-uploads roster: (1) direct notice when job is re-scheduled; (2) direct/live-informing when a tech arrives and/or departs from each job; and (3) direct notice of each event when a message is left for a customer (or similar significant to job-progress event).
It appears, evidently, NEW is campaigning hard (and perhaps other entities are as well) to maintain a live and real grasp of how each job is progressing.
Regardless, we have added each of these new transaction functionalities into SBDL (though not all show as discrete options within the SBDL interface):
Here is a specific explanation for each of these options, as now setup:
Looking in the first of the checkboxes as now configured, you'll see it reads similarly (though not quite the same) as compared to what was added in that position three months back:
| From Three Months Ago | New/Current |
 |
 |
Formerly, if you had the above-option checked, JobRecord HistoryNotes would be added with each sub-status upload. Specifically, they'd be added as a single (and typically large) block of text, within a Comment section that was directly appurtenant to the sub-status update itself. In other words, it was simply part of the status update (a mere comment appended to the same), and was not a transactional-upload event in and of itself.
We discovered, with such notes provided in this fashion, they were not reaching the eyes of persons interested in seeing such details (such as NEW personnel). Upon also learning some users were being pressed to log into their ServiceBench online interfaces to manually enter notes each time they talked to (or left a message with, etc.) a customer, we decided we needed to upload JobRecord history notes (and with each note as a separate item) directly into the same place users were being asked to do it manually.
So, if you now have the first sub-option checked (as above illustrated); it will invoke a rather different underlying action, as compared to before. Instead of uploading the entire JobRecord historical narrative as a mere add-on comment with the status upload, it will instead upload each discrete entry, as added to the applicable JobRecord history since the last prior update. It will upload each such new item individually, and using a dedicated ServiceBench Add-Comments transaction as made for the purpose. In result, these notes should now be placed precisely where needed for appropriate visibility by underlying ServiceBench clients (e.g., NEW).
Now we focus on a checkbox option that is indeed totally new, with this morning's release:
As its wording suggests, this one will upload to ServiceBench notice whenever you change an appointment (or make a new one) on an applicable job (i.e., one that was dispatched to you by ServiceBench). Much like that above-described "Comment" upload, it's being done via a dedicated SB transaction we'd not formerly been employing.
Though the third status/sub-option checkbox is not new with this release, we'll nevertheless provide some contextual explication (in particular, for any who may have missed the explanatory email from three months ago):
Normally, SB-dispatched jobs are put to bed ("closed") via the claim-filing process, as done from within ServiceDesk. The problem is this sometimes does not occur in the intended fashion. In particular, we've learned for some servicers it's quite common to have a job dispatched by Lowes, with a claim being made against Whirlpool. This fails to close the Lowes job. This option (as added three months ago) is designed to assure closing occurs, regardless. Indeed, it should assure closing after a JobRecord is moved to the archive, whether a claim was involved in any manner.
You may notice there are no checkbox options for turning on or off what we described, early in this post, as another addition to the arsenal of status-upload related functions: direct/live-informing when a tech arrives and/or departs from each job. There is no sub-checkbox for this, because this function is not sub-optional. If you have the main/general "Uploading of Job Status" frame checked, general status changes will be uploaded, along with when the sub-status changes because a tech has arrived or departed from a job. We simply do not contemplate anyone will want to upload status generally, and not want to do the arrive/depart sub-status change as well.
Of course, it's also true that if you do not have your techs using SD-Mobile (or using it but not doing it live as per design intent) there will not be a basis to do the live reporting of their arrivals and departures. Uploading of those events depends on the system itself having due notice.
Please be aware, BTW, these new functions, that are
optional, default as unchecked. If you want the functions to
occur, you need to check the applicable boxes.
Improved MailList-Maker Export:
Hit Alt-F3 in ServiceDesk and it brings up what was originally called the MakeMailList form:
It was called that because, originally, its only function was to produce the output that's now but the first among nine (the other export options have gradually been added).
Anyhow, that oldest and original function was, until just prior to this release, very creaky -- to such an extent that, for a large database, it could take many hours to do its task. The plain fact is the underlying program code was doing the needed work in a very inefficient manner, and this is a place where efficiency counts. Part of what's involved in constructing a Mail-List export is winnowing through the entire mass of JobRecords, to assure the output has but one line-item for each actual customer (and not repeated line-items where you've done repeated work for that customer). We also want to assure there is no more than one line item for each physical address. This prevents us, for example, from sending multiple mails to the same household if different persons there ordered service from us (say once by the husband, and once by the wife). It also prevents us from sending a mail item to both a former owner/resident (who's long since moved elsewhere) and the current resident too. The system is configured, for any given address, to export a line-item only for the name as most-recently associated with a given address.
The old method as underlying this export engaged in a painstaking process of checking each potential addition, within the range of all prior additions, before adding it into the export. It was logical, but with many tens of thousands of records could result in a very slow progression. It also was limited to producing no more than 32,767 actual output items.
Our improved method uses a more clever algorithm to achieve the same result, but in a much more efficient manner, meaning for large data sets it will run very, very much faster. It also overcomes the 32,767 limit.
Added "Items-Returned" Figures to the PartsProcess Form's Acquisitions Report:
A little more than a year ago (see notes accompanying Rel. 4.5.34) we added the Acquisitions Report (Ctrl-F8-->Q). It's purpose is to itemize, by vendor, the cost and quantity of items purchased within a defined period. Recently a user requested visibility into quantity and value of items returned. This release offers the first step.
What we've done, substantively, is to simply add a couple of new columns to the Acquisitions Report. One indicates (again, itemized for each vendor) the cost of items returned, and the other the quantity.
There are some limitations in this initial offering.
So far, we're tallying special-order returns only (i.e., items managed
as inventory are not included). Also, there is a little bit of
fiction in terms of applicability to the date range. The return
tallies are based on the same criteria (for the parent special-order
request fitting the specified date range) as are the main entries.
This is in spite of the fact the actual return dates may (likely are)
different, and dates of any credits received are likely more different
still.
New Option for No-Visit Pseudo-Appointments:
Approximately five months ago (see notes accompanying Rel. 4.6.5) we made it so "naked" appointments (i.e., ones direct-created within the F6 form and without any connection to an underlying JobRecord) port to techs in SD-Mobile (as reviewed in those notes, it's pointed out that while it had always been possible to create such "naked" appointments in ServiceDesk, prior to that improvement they had not shown for techs in their SD-Mobile interface).
We mention the above for context and distinction (and, yes, I am still sufficiently juvenile to enjoying saying "naked").
Our present new feature, instead of involving non-job-tied "naked" appointments, involves a new kind. Unlike the animals just discussed, these are tied to jobs, but (and regardless) do not involve any real intent to meet with a customer. Rather, they involve what we'll henceforth call pseudo-appointments (for those of you who do not while away your hours memorizing How-to-Expand-Your-Vocabulary books, pseudo means fake, pretend, not real).
Why would you want a fake appointment -- and as tied to a specific job?
The reason is simple. It's to serve as a device that prompts for one or more needed actions on that job, but in situations other than where the customer is expecting the tech to be knocking on the front door.
For example, suppose, based on a WipAlert, you notice a tech was at a customer's home two days ago, and was supposed to research something to further the repair, but there's no evidence he's done it. Solution? Create one of our new pseudo-appointments. It's a way of prompting him to do the research, and booking a time-slot for him to do it within.
You can use these new creatures for any such (or similar) purpose. Best of all, your techs are permitted (even expected) to do PostVisitReports on them (in this context you'll need to think of such PVRs as as pseudo-PVRs), which nicely accommodates things like resultant creation of part orders, or of new real appointments, etc.
So how do you make one of these new pseudo-appointments?
It's pretty simple. In the F6 form we've added a new column of characters, on the very far left. The characters are simple checkmarks. Every standard appointment (even a "naked" appointment) has one:
These checkmarks denote simply that the appointment is not one of our new animals. In other words, it's not a pseudo-appointment. It is a "real" (or at least a "naked") appointment.
Given the above, if you want to create a new animal, you simply need to uncheck that box. It's default state is checked, which signifies "I am a real (even if possibly 'naked') appointment." Simply uncheck to indicate otherwise.
What are the consequences of unchecking?
A major reason this project has been somewhat long in coming is because there are a plethora of contexts within which a pseudo-appointment -- if it's going to be correctly treated as such -- must be treated differently. This plethora meant a lot of work, seeking to make each such context appropriately different. Here is a partial listing:
-
Historical notations (as made in each applicable JobRecord when an appointment is created) are changed as needed to reflect this different kind of "appointment."
-
Within the DispatchMap, the display of pseudo-appointments is altered, to make it visually apparent they are not true appointments with the customer. This alteration consists of changing the display color (of the applicable list-item reference) to a semi-feint grey:
On making this change, we realized it would be sensible to display the old naked-appointments with the same visual distinction, and it is now so. -
Similarly, it seemed appropriate to refrain from adding these pseudo-appointments to the count of actual/true appointments as displayed in the DispatchMap, so (and in common with naked-appointments) they are withheld from that tally. On the other hand, if you decide to use an above-zero JobCount value for any such animal, it's important to include such JobCounts in the JobCount tally, and that is indeed done as well.
-
Still within the DispatchMap, while it seems appropriate to show pseudo-appointments as applicable within each tech's list section, it does not seem appropriate to show them within the graphic area. That distinction is indeed made.
-
Continuing within the DispatchMap, each of its contained methods for conveying dispatch-list info to the tech (as offered when you click on a tech's name at the top of his list of jobs) needed altered to make explicit, in regard to any pseudo-job, that a pseudo-appointment is what's involved, and not a real appointment where the tech is expected to drive to the customer's home (we noticed while doing this work, incidentally, that the old Naked-Appointments were not prior being including in these various outputs, and this was simultaneously addressed). There were no less than 12 different outputs that required significant modification in this category.
-
Continuing still within the DispatchMap, the route integrations with MapPoint and GoogleMaps needed altering to assure pseudo-appointments would not be included in their work.
-
Finally within the DispatchMap, the Confirm-Appointment-with-Customer functions (via Email and/or RoboCall) needed altering to assure pseudo-appointments were not included in their operations.
-
Outside the DispatchMap (but still within ServiceDesk), each of the tech-performance reports (as relating to how they score in regard to fulfilling appointments) required altering to assure pseudo-appointments do not alter their results. There were two of these to deal with.
-
Within SD-MobileLink, changes were needed to assure this new element of information (distinguishing between a pseudo-appointment and a real one) is appropriately uploaded to each tech.
-
Within SD-Mobile, it was essential that, for any pseudo-appointment given the tech, we provide a reasonable notification it is not a regular appointment (i.e., where he's expected to drive to the job). On the JobsRoster page, for example, there is this distinction:
On the JobDetails page, we figured the notice should be much more hard-to-miss, so there we have created this extremely-visible indication:
-
Similarly, much as it was important to exclude pseudo-appointments from the automated tech-drive/routing modes as offered in the ServiceDesk DispatchMap (i.e., via integrations to MapPoint or GoogleMaps), the same was important for such parallel functions as are present in the SD-Mobile. Ditto, in regarding to excluding pseudo-appointments from the semi-automated RoboCall-Next-Visit-to-Announce-Tech-is-On-His-Way feature.
-
Finally, in regard to SD-Mobile, there are a plethora of checks the system engages in to assure the tech has correctly prepped everything prior to submission of his PVR. Many of these are not sensibly applicable in a pseudo-appointment/pseudo-PVR situation. They needed to be appropriately excluded for that contest.
-
Okay, the above was not quite final. Within both ServiceDesk and SD-MobileLink, PVR-historical-text insertions had to be modified to insert differently for any PVR as submitted on a pseudo-appointment (e.g., if the tech reported that he worked on a pseudo-appointment-triggered concern from 2.35 to 2.58, you wouldn't want a resultant historical entry to read "PD there 13 THU, 14:35 to 14:58;" instead, an entry in this context has been programmed to insert in the form "PD invlvd 13 THU, 14:35 to 14:58").
As many connected operations as we have thought to appropriately modify, it's possible we missed one or more, that we should have thought of. It's also perhaps more than likely (for a set of modifications covering so great a scope) that one or more have been imperfect. Regardless, please let us know if you see something we missed or did wrong.
As a final matter of concern (and this falls entirely on you), it's very important to assure you and your techs are updated to our concurrent releases of SD-MobileLink and SD-Mobile (both must be Vers. 1.4.115 or above) before you create any of these new pseudo-appointments. Earlier versions will not know to treat them differently. In other words, if you create one of these new animals and concurrent updates are not done on the Mobile side, any pseudo-appointment will look to the tech like a real one. Thus, he's likely to go to the customer's home, but with no real appointment. Please don't let his happen. Assure your Mobile-system apps are fully updated before creating any of these new animals!
In concluding this entry, we realize you may desire an easy, shorthand method to distinguish between real/normal appointments, our new pseudo-appointments, and the old variant/option of naked-appointments. Try this:
(a) A naked-appointment is sans any JobRecord (but may expect the tech's presence at a particular place and time);
(b) A pseudo-appointment is sans any real visit (but is JobRecord attached);
(c) A true/normal appointment
includes both.
Option to Include Consumer's Email Address in Claims:
Recently, ServiceBench provided a new claim-upload format that accommodates several new fields (see notes accompanying Rel. 4.6.15). Among these is one for the consumer's email address. In conjunction with this, SD's on-screen NARDA was re-configured with a number of new boxes, to accommodate the new fields, including one for the consumer email address. Claim-upload mechanisms were similarly changed so that, if you have text in that new email box, it is appropriately uploaded to ServiceBench as an inclusion within your claim.
But there is something we did not do.
Specifically, we did not make it so the consumer's email address would automatically pull from the underlying JobRecord, and auto-fill for you to this new box in the on-screen NARDA.
The reason we did not is we'd prior heard from some servicers that they were reluctant to share email addresses, as collected by them, with manufacturers.
Recently we had a request from some other servicers to accommodate this auto-filling (one or more manufacturers, evidently, were pressuring them to provide such data). So, to accommodate both those who wish to provide the information -- and simultaneously those who do not -- we have now made the email-to-NARDA auto-fill function available, but optional.
In fact, we've done a little better than making it a mere blanket option. You can pick the particular underlying clients for whom you want the auto-fill, and have it for them, but not for others.
The option is via a new checkbox in the QuickEntryTemplate as applicable to each QET client:
Very simply, the email-address-auto-fill will occur for those clients where you've checked this box, and will not for those where you have not checked it. It defaults to un-checked, so be to sure to go in and check it (for the underlying manufacturer for whom needed) if you desire the auto-fill.
AttnNotes Now Included in Emailed Job Summary:
When you're in the DispatchMap and you click on a tech's name at the job of his list of jobs, you get a plethora of choices, regarding actions you might wish to perform in regard to that list. Among those options is to send a summary of all the jobs via email:
Until now, that particular production did not include
AttnNotes (aka "SkickyNotes") from the underlying JobRecords. Now it does.
QuickLink to the my.rossware.net Dispostion-on-Robo-Calling Report:
Are you using the CyberOffice-based features to confirm your next days' appointments? If not, did you know, with a very quick action each afternoon, you can have ServiceDesk send emails or automated telephone calls (aka "robo-calls") to each of your tomorrow's appointments, reminding them of the appointment, providing the time-frame, and requesting confirmation? Yes you can, and it's very cool.
Whether you use the email or robo-call method (you may in fact choose to use either, both or a combination), upon the customer confirming, cancelling or re-scheduling, the result is automatically placed back into ServiceDesk for you, along with a nice notation in the JobRecord's historical narrative. In the case of robo-calling, though, there are circumstances where nothing may come back. In particular, the customer may not answer their phone, in which case you may be curious to verify what happened on the robo-call (how many times it tried, when it tried, if it left a voice message, etc.). That's what this new feature is for.
Wherever in a JobRecord's narrative history you see the expression "robo-call," you may double-click on the expression, and ServiceDesk will take you to the specifically-applicable report on (as otherwise available by logging in to) the my.rossware.net website. In other words, that expression within a JobRecord's history text is, in effect, a hyperlink to said report.
Thus, you may double-click on what's shown as highlighted here:
To get instantly to an online report that looks something like this (the true telephone number below is blanked, because the image is from a real report):
If you forget this QuickLink trick, we've also inserted a ToolTip reminder to help. Whenever ServiceDesk sees that that magic expression ("robo-call") exists in a JobRecord's narrative history, it will display a ToolTip as follows when you float your mousepointer over the JobHistory box:
If you are interested in this feature and have not
setup with it, please call, and we'll work to get you going.
New "Funds Collected" Report:
Some two-and-a-half years ago (see entry accompanying Rel. 4.4.7) we introduced a new report, designed to itemize (categorized by collection source) each item of money as ostensibly collected, throughout your system, for any given date or date range. This was to provide a direct means by which to easily reconcile the money that's actually turned in by each source, for such period, with what easily reconcile the money that's actually turned in by each source, for such period, with what should have been turned in. It's been a popular report, but recently we were asked for something different.
For context of consideration here, we have always had a method whereby ServiceDesk is primed to give you notice if any item of money -- as supposedly collected -- does not ultimately show up for processing. The original (and still in-place) method is rather on the back-end. It assumes you've used some means of direct-checking as tickets are turned in, to assure appropriate matching monies are there (such as, for example, that new report we added two-and-a-half years ago). It then watches after the fact. Essentially, PVRs (and similar processes) create entries in the FundsJournal regarding each money item supposedly received. When deposited (or similarly processed), these items are "checked off." If any items persist without being checked off, they bring visible notice to themselves, by virtue of their growing and obvious datedness. If still not checked off, they ultimately trigger a direct complaint, that positively forces notice. This is our back-end assurance. Your own vigilance is the front-end.
In a nutshell, our two-and-a-half-year-ago-added report provides a very nicely augmented means to assist you in exercising due diligence at the front end. Essentially, it gives you a front-end check-off list. On a daily basis, you can print the report, and easily verify that each item of indicated money indeed shows up.
Our new report gives you a middle check. Suppose an item gets by you at the just-described front end. Maybe you did the front-end check, noticed an item missing, intended to follow up, but then got distracted by other matters, and forgot. Or, perhaps you have techs that turn in monies at such disparate times as to make that front-end check (at least via a single report) not very practical. Suppose any of the above, and you don't want to wait for our traditional back-end method to give you notice of items that did not show up. Again, we're talking a middle check.
Our new report is designed, simply, to list money items not yet checked-off as deposited. More specifically, lists them with the same "source""categorizations as the traditional front-end report (i.e., a section for each tech, one for POS, one for monies received in payment on A/as the traditional front-end report (i.e., a section for each tech, one for POS, one for monies received in payment on A/Rs, etc.). The obvious underlying logic is that if an item has not been checked-off as deposited, there is not yet verification (via such means) you have indeed collected if from the source involved.
Navigation to this new report is simple. Our report from two-and-a-years ago has been accessed, directly, via this item in the FundsControl (F9) form:
Now, if you pick that same option, you get a choice between that longstanding (front-level) report and the new (middle-level) one as now offered:
The second of the above-highlighted choices will give you the new report.
New "Itemize Vendor Invoice" Report:
This report involves an addition to the InventoryControl (F10) form. Before discussing the report itself, we'll first disclose we did at little rearranging in this form's main functions menu. Here is a comparison:
| Old | New |
 |
 |
As you can see, aside from the fact a new item is added (the real subject of this entry), there is also some re-sequencing of items. On adding that new item, we realized the prior sequencing of functions had been less logical than it should have been. So, we worked on that logic, and added a little line divider to separate functions into two logical groups.
Now for our real topic. Do you see which item, above, is the new one? Here is some help:
This report was long requested by Bob at GRA-NEVA
Appliance Service. He calls it a "Receiving Report." The
idea is to provide an easy means to see precisely what was ostensibly
received on a given invoice from a given vendor. It allows an easy
means to verify what was entered as received corresponds with what
the vendor has on his invoice. When you run the report, it will
initially display on-screen. However, the form's PrintList button
will appear, and you can just click on it if wanting to print.
Dramatically-Enhanced Spiffs System:
Earlier this year (see entry accompanying Rel. 4.6.8) we offered a very simple (e.g., lightweight, minimal) system to accommodate a program of special, motivational payments you might wish to setup for your employees. It was, indeed, minimal. With this release, we offer a much-expanded (and considerably more integrated) spiffs system.
In fact, the design of this system is such that it might (according to your preference) constitute an entire compensation system for your techs, and according to your own design (i.e., in lieu of hourly, salary or commission basis).
There is a new mini-manual fully describing this new system. For the new mini-manual you may either click here, or, if you go within ServiceDesk to its Rate of Earnings form (Alt-F2), there is a new button there to provide a link:
Integrated Facilitation for Direct-Ship-to-Customer Part Orders:
Have you heard of doing this?
Instead of having special-order parts shipped to your own office location (where you must unpack, inspect, temporarily store -- and, finally, arrange for transfer to the tech prior to his returning to the home for a scheduled visit -- you instead have them shipped direct to the customer.
In this mode, there's no need to for you to unpack, inspect, store or transfer to the tech. You just schedule for the tech to go out, and send him. He finds the parts waiting for him on his arrival. Among other advantages, if the part is of the kind where cosmetic blemishes can lead to rejection by the customer (e.g., a refrigerator door panel), you can ask the customer to open and inspect prior to even booking the return appointment. This can save many wasted trips.
You may be skeptical of this method (and, sure, there a few drawbacks), but the advantages are legion. Those intrepid businesses that have switched to the method vehemently swear by it. They say they'd never go back, in a million years.
Enter our new feature.
If you're using the direct-ship method, there's a considerable amount of added info to give your vendor, in connection with each ordered item (or set of items as applicable to a particular job). Specifically, you must provide the customer's full shipping data. It's at least three lines of text, and takes considerable time to manually provide in each instance.
That's why we've added a new method in the F8 form's Assemble-Order interface. This is where you select the display category titled "Items needing ordered." You then do a series of Ctrl/Right-Clicks on the items you wish to include in the particular request you are formulating (i.e., "marking" them for inclusion), then hit Enter on your keyboard. At this point you're presented with a dialog that asks you to pick the particular method, as wanted, for conveying the order to your vendor. Here's a comparison of that dialog box, from old (prior to this release) to new:
| Old dialog, as shown in F8 after you've selected items for inclusion in an order, then hit Enter | Image of the new dialog, with newly-added option circled |
 |
 |
As you can see, the new option involves emailing your order, with inclusion of "ShipDirectToCustomer Instructions."
Here is what the long-offered (and standard) Abbreviated-format request looks like:
As compared to the new, ShipDirectToCustomer-oriented request:
Logically, the system looks for appropriate ship-to information in each request-item's attached JobRecord. Exercising further logic, if it's a JobRecord that lacks a consumer's addresses (particularly as in a POS situation that was not setup for direct-shipping to the customer), or one that's designated as a ShopJob, the system will automatically alter the request to specify shipment to your office, as opposed to the consumer.
New "Resurrection" Option in archived-PartsProcess:
Back in June (see entry accompanying Rel. 4.6.16) we introduced a "HpToRtrn" status category for PartsProcess items. This was to accommodate the situation where you have a maximum return quota with a particular vendor, and present return of the item in question would exceed that quota. Thus, you place it into this status to designate you'll want to return if sufficient future vacancies allow, or (even better) you'd love to use it in the meantime on a different job, should the opportunity arise.
There's one element we did not work out in that scheme. It is this. Suppose some other job comes along on which you can use the item in question. How do you transfer it from the job on which it was originally ordered (and not used) to the one you wish to use it on now. We simply did not go so far, last June, as to work through this conundrum.
Of course, our users are ever-practical, and Mitch at Video Tech Center invented an answer. His solution was to employ a method we created in December 2010 for a somewhat different purpose: the "Resurrect" facility (see entry accompanying Rel. 4.4.89). The general idea, in a "resurrection," is an archived-PartsProcess item can be restored back into the current context. As originally conceived, this resurrection option was provided solely for the situation where you allowed a Process item to go to archive before realizing you needed to attach a daughter-band for the purpose of managing a core return. Resurrection allows you to restore it back to current for that purpose.
In a nutshell, Mitch realized he could use resurrection for a different purpose. However, he also discovered the existing structure (as tailored for its original purpose) was not optimum to his invention. So, we've made a variation that is:
| Old dialog, as shown in Crtrl-F8 when you right-click on a process-item | New dialog, with newly-added function circled |
 |
 |
As you can see, the new dialog adds a new/second resurrection option. If you pick that option, you'll further get this dialog:
Obviously, if you want to move the item's application to a different job (i.e., different from the one it was formerly ordered-in for), this dialog provides the basis.
This new method provides appropriate documentation at all points. The moved-to JobRecord will have an appropriate notation in its narrative history, so on, and etc.
Other PartsProcess Improvements:
There are too many of these to list individually, but simultaneous with the current new features we fixed an entire series of moderate defects that had been noted, particularly as regards our cradle-to-grave structure.
QuickLink to RepairClinic.com:
RepairClinic.com (http://repairclinic.com) has become a useful website for many businesses. Some of you are going there with great frequency, especially to lookup parts as applicable to a particular model. To make this easier, we've added a new QuickLink. In the F8 form, just do a Ctrl/Right-Click on any model number (specifically, as present within a process-item's Model-Number field). In response to this simple action, ServiceDesk will open a RepairClinic.com website page for you, with a completed search on the model in question.
If you forget the command, it's also been added to the contextual CheatSheet (just right-click in the colorful label-area at top of the F8 form), as follows:
We have also, incidentally, added the same function
into SD-Mobile.
Protection Against Unintended "Within-90-Days Repeat" Claims:
The request for this came from Ken at Shaughnessy Appliance (in Alberta, Canada), and in retrospect I realize it's a feature that should have been there long ago. Quite simply, when you go to submit a claim from ServiceDesk's Alt-F4 FinishedForms context, the system will automatically do a behind-the-scenes check, to see if any other relevant claims were prior submitted within 90 days preceding. Any such prior claim could potentially be on the same job, or on a different job but involving the same underlying unit. Depending on which is the case, if applicable, you'll get a message such as this:
Or this:
All you need for this new benefit is to do the update.
Improved Formatting for Lowes Claims:
From time-to-time we learn on the basis of feedback that particular elements of claim-formatting must be done in uniquely different ways, for particular underlying claimed-upon payers. As we make these discoveries, we adjust our claim-formatting mechanisms to appropriately adapt. Recently we learned of a whole slew of departure-from-the-normal-rule elements that needed to be applied when claims are submitted to ServiceBench, and with Lowes as the claimed-upon party. Absent these unique applications, it turns out, claims as uploaded under Lowes accounts have required online fixing of particular element before they are accepted. Such online fixing is not something we want you to have to do.
This release incorporates all the unique-to-Lowes modifications, which we have just learned are in fact necessary. If you have prior found that all of your Lowes claims required after-the-upload-online-fixing, you should now be pleasantly surprised to find this is no longer the case.
Enhanced/Built-in Re-sorting of Certain DataFiles, Plus Reporting-Checks:
One of the most immutable rules of programming is borrowed from larger life: it's that infamous "Law of Unintended Consequences."
Bowing to demand, we have in the last couple of years made it increasingly easy (in the latest addition of ability, see notes below accompanying Rel. 4.5.60, it's virtually automatic), to make entries to the SalesJournal on the basis of putative entry dates that are other than the true current date. It turns out that out-of-date-sequence entries can cause issues for certain reports and processes that expect to sort through a file rapidly to find entries fitting a range of dates.
Based on such issues, a significant while back we added mechanisms that automatically re-sort the SalesJournal with each nightly housekeeping event. But it turns out other files are affected too, including (most particularly) the FundsJournal. We have also found that sometimes folks simply backdate a computer, and by such means manage to input entries that mess up the normally-expected sequence of dates.
To address such issues, this release adds further built-in, automated nightly sorting for the FundsJournal and InventoryMovementsJournal.
Additionally, since there are number reports within the F11 Reports form that rely on the SalesJournal being appropriately sorted, this release also adds a behind-the-scenes checking mechanism, designed to assure it's not out-of-sequence whenever you go to run a report there.
New Printing Option from FinishedForms:
This picture likely says it all:
Sometimes folks use the FinishedForms to make a
nice printed invoice for property managers, and similar. We
learned sometimes when the bill is big and the paying company sees the
tech was only there for a short while, it causes problems. This
option gives you the opportunity to refrain from showing the time or
times your tech was on premises at the job.
New Warranty-Claim Format -- for Warrantech:
When you're in the Alt-F4 FinishedForms interface and to go to transmit a claim, there has long been a significant list of entities for whom the claim can be formatted. The final option has long read "Others . . ." It has further long been the case that when you click on "Others," you get a little message that essentially says: "If you need to submit claims in any format other than as listed here, let us know, and we'll add that format to the list."
That just happened in regard to Warrantech, a company that markets and services extended product warranties. An option to format claims in their format has now been added:
If you need assistance understanding which boxes from the onscreen Narda fill to which Warrantech fields, please use the Translation Tips, just as for any other format. Please also be aware there is no direct-transmit method for Warrantech claims. Just as with Dacor, Fisher Paykel and Samsung, you'll be saving claim info into a file, and it will then be up to you to assure that file is appropriately uploaded to Warrantech.
Additionally, please note we are not confident these
claims will work perfectly, right out of the box. Warrantech's
documentation (regarding the expected claims format), leaves significant
ambiguity. From such documents we have made our best
interpretation of what they are seeking, but your experience may prove
our interpretation was off. If so, we will need (and look forward
to) feedback to correct.
New Feature to Cope with Teeny Return Quotas on Parts:
Recently we heard from a user that Samsung has imposed a limit on the quantity of parts that can be returned, within any given month, and return credit received. The limit, we understand, is 5% of whatever is the total purchased.
OUCH!!!!!!
This means if you've done $10K in purchases in a given month, your returns cannot exceed $500. It's a pretty tiny limit, and means you could potentially be stuck with some losses, if ServiceDesk did not do its best to help you (even then you might, but at the least ServiceDesk should do all that it can).
That's what this release is about.
We have added a new HoldLoc category in the PartsProcess system, as follows:
The idea is, if you need to return an item and either lack quota space for the return within the current month or you want to delay until deciding how to juggle items within your max quota, place the PartsProcess item into this new category. It can then be reviewed and managed, under that particular and new category, via the various "To-The-Grave" management functions, just as is applicable with other categories.
In this case, there is an added and further special function. You are likely familiar with the fact that when a user is working to special-order a part (and when the same part number happens to exist in inventory), the system attempts to interdict the order. Basically, it injects a message informing your user that the part is in inventory, and it would make far greater sense to use the instance that's in inventory, as opposed to special-ordering the item.
So, here's the further logic. If you can be assisted in using a part that you'd been hoping to return (by having notice provided when a user is about to re-order the same item), it not only means more quickly satisfying what had been perceived as an order need; much more powerfully, it means there's no longer a need to fit that return within your very skinny return allowance (thereby making potential space for other returns within said allowance).
So, what we've done is added to the same behind-the-scenes call that looks within your inventory to see if an about-to-be-processed special-order request can be satisfied from inventory. That same call now makes a further check, to see if there are any special-order items in the Special-Order system in this new status, and from which the request can be satisfied. If so, it presents a message similar to the following:
Nothing is needed for implementation of this new
feature, save using the new category. There is, however, one
caveat. The system creates its behind-the-scenes ready-access list
(that is consulted for this check) each night as part of the
Auto-Archive process. This means that if in a current day you have
just added an item into this new category, it is not available
for producing any of these new alerts until the following day.
New/Advanced Format for ServiceBench Claims:
Recently ServiceBench introduced some new claim fields, that allow us to now provide more information as connected with each claim. This release of ServiceDesk will upload in the new format, and is needed for all ServiceBench claims henceforth, as it's this new format their system is now expecting.
Among the new fields that will now be uploaded is a "Date Started" field. This is different (and to be distinguished) from the long-standing "Date Call Taken" (aka OriginDate) field. Its purpose, in part, is to allow improved metrics on service company performance. For a long time, servicers complained that in many instances longer cycle times were induced by the fact a consumer requested a first appointment that was many days (sometimes weeks) out. Where the only measurement of cycle time was a comparison between OrginDate and CompletionDate, this kind of situation was indeed sinister. The new field is intended as an indication of when the tech first walked into the customer's home, to begin work. A comparison between that date and CompletionDate can be significantly more meaningful.
Within SD's on-screen NARDA, we've jostled the boxes a bit to accommodate some of the new stuff. Here is one comparison:
| Old section area | New section area |
 |
 |
If you look carefully you'll see there is also a new CustomersEmail box. We have not currently coded for this box to auto-fill with importation of a job to the NARDA, as it's our estimation servicers may typically not wish to share email addresses (such as they may have collected) with underlying ServiceBench clients. If you fill-in the box with an email address, it will nevertheless transfer to ServiceBench (in other words, for the time-being we are leaving this field for you to fill-in manually, if it's a piece of information you want to upload).
Another difference in the new format is that, where
COD jobs are involved, ServiceDesk can now (assuming such information is
provided in the NARDA) upload information concerning amounts charged and
monies collected (if you do not desire to so upload, simply leave this
info absent from within the NARDA).
Printing Option in PartsPick Form:
Slightly more than a year ago, we introduced the wonderful PartsPick form (Ctrl-Shift/F8). Its purpose is to provide a one-stop venue, to see all parts that should be getting moved to or from each truck, as relevant to the past and next day's work. Recently someone pointed out there is often a need to move away from the computer screen, to where parts are actually at, to accomplish these movements, and it would enhance ease if the information could easily printed to a piece of paper, which, in turn, a person can then use to walk about, locating each applicable item.
Ask and ye shall receive.
In it's lower-right corner, the form now has a new button:
If you want to print the list, click on the button.
It's that simple.
Better Accommodation in the Inventory System for Multiple Warehouse/StoreRooms:
Initially, SD's Inventory Control system was built with the assumption that, aside from such inventory as kept on each truck, each service operation would have a single inventory storeroom ("OF"), and movements to and from the the trucks would all be via that single location. You might call this the "assumed-office-storeroom-as-hub" premise.
In bits and pieces, we have transcended that premise.
Quite a long time ago, for example, we made it so you can specify and manage inventory locations that are independent of either techs or the assumed office storeroom. Just a couple of years ago, we made it so restock shipments can be checked directly into any location, with no need to pass through the office storeroom first.
Recently some users have wanted to further transcend the "assumed-office-storeroom-as-hub" premise. This release accomplishes such transcendence in two respects:
1. Within the F10 form's two main Transfer-Items functions (typically used to restock a tech from office inventory), you may now optionally designate a source other than "OF" as the "pull-from" location. Stated more simply, you may now move a set of designated items directly from one truck (or any other non-"OF" location) to another.
To do so, you simply must select the function in a slightly revised manner (this slight revision informs SD of your intent to specify a different-than-standard "OF" source for what's being moved)
We added the capabilities in this manner because we did not want to slow down the more typical scenario by placing an added inquiry into it. As you can see from the above, if you want the source to be other than the standard "OF," just right-click to select the function (as opposed to what would otherwise be a normal left-click) -- or, if you're using the quick-key access method, hold down Ctrl while doing so. Either method tells ServiceDesk you want to designate other than "OF" as the source, and it will provide a dialog for you to indicate such other.
2. When speculatively-tagging items from stock for particular jobs, you may now indicate a source (for such tagged items) other than "OF." Suppose, for example, you have a second physical location (with its own inventory storeroom), and sub-set of techs who work from it. If you're spec-tagging parts for jobs those particular techs will be going on, you'll want to tag them to inventory as located at that secondary location, and not at your main one.
The contextual guide to use of this feature is provided in the F7 form (i.e., same context from which you initiate a spec-tag) via a Tooltip that arises when you float your mousepointer over its "Tag Part for Visit" button.
As you can see, the method to designate other-than-standard/assumed-location parallels what we just saw above. Do a right-click (as opposed to standard left-click) on the button, or modify the quick-key shortcut with Ctrl (please note that if you happen to have your Windows focus in a text box, the "Ctrl-V" quick-key method will be superseded as a Windows Insert command).
Alternate Sales-Tax Rates for POS operations at Satellite Locations:
If you have multiple locations, each conducting POS operations, and if those locations are subject to different tax rates, this one is for you.
This is one of those solutions where the need is so rare that, rather than providing a direct user interface whereby you can specify this variation, we're asking you (should you have the need) to create a little file that will tell ServiceDesk what it needs to know for your circumstance.
Here are the brief instructions:
-
Open any text editor (e.g., Word, WordPad, NotePad, etc.).
-
Type the first rate (it's the rate on materials if you're U.S.; PST if you're Canadian), then Tab, and type in the second rate (the rate on labor if you're U.S., GST if you're Canadian). Type each rate as a decimal fraction (e.g., 7.25 percent would be typed as .0725).
-
Save the file as "MyPosTaxRates.TXT", and be sure to save as as "File-Type" Text-Only.
-
Place a copy of this file into the operative LocalData folder as applicable to each station where needed (i.e., any that needs POS tax rates other than as placed into the ServiceDesk Settings form). To determine which is the applicable LocalData folder at any station, bring up its About ServiceDesk form; a list of applicable paths is in the lower-left.
The above is all you must do. ServiceDesk looks for the above-described file on startup. If it sees it, if reads inside to find the two, special-for-local-use rates you have provided. It then applies these in the POS context, for the station involved.
Spiffs (or Alternate Use):
Occasionally, we accommodate needs, but in less than a royal fashion (our logic is that it's impossible to do everything royally, and some provision is better than none). In this case, a client finds it useful to pay techs particular add-ons, for things like selling water filters. It's practical for the operator that's making SalesJournal entries to keep an eye out for those particular items where such spiffs should apply, but less practical to make notes in each instance in any context outside of ServiceDesk. A method was desired via which said operator could denote, as connected with each such SalesEntry, when any such spiff was applicable. This release accommodates that.
Specifically, when in the SalesEnter form (F9) and making an entry, if as an operator you note it's a sale on which a spiff should apply (or any other special notice you want to attach to the sale), simply right-click in your entry line, before hitting Enter to insert it. This can be done before you've entered text, during or after. What matters is simply that it's before hitting Enter for the line's insertion.
In response to this right-click action, the system will query you for text entry (up to eight characters), which will become part of that SalesJournal entry, in a special little OtherData field. If you're using it for the Spiff purpose, perhaps you'll put in an actual amount (or perhaps a description of the Spiff: whatever purpose you wish to achieve).
This new/extra field is not generally viewable, because at this point we've not wanted to revise all the other many mechanisms with which the SalesJournal is associated (it would be a more major project than we're presently ready to undertake for this purpose).
Instead, the main place to make use of this new field is in a Sales data export, as available from the Reports form (F11), after having ran a SalesSummary report for any period of interest (look for the "Export with Extended Data" button in the form's lower-right). When you run the export, you'll find a new field in the output labeled "OtherData." This field will contain whatever you've input via the method above-described.
Of course, you may sometimes find mistakes were made, and need to be fixed. For that reason, we've also provided limited access to this field from the SalesView form (Shift-F3). Simply use the method you wish there to display the item or items of interest. If you wish to see (and perhaps revise) the "OtherData" field as attached to any item, simply right-click on it.
Again, the mechanism we've provided for this purpose
is a bit "back-door"-ish in nature, but for now (and for the
particular/atypical need involved) we hope it will be adequate.
New "Time-Allocations" Report:
Back with release of Ver. 4.4.68 (see entry here for 5/24/10) we introduced an awesome DTR-Viewer (Daily-Time-Report) , via which you may review, with super-intuitive graphics, precisely the time segments each tech spent on the clock, and -- for such segments -- which specific portions were checked-in/working at actual customer jobsites. It's a super tool, and, if you've not been making use of it, we highly encourage you to do so.
Recently, certain users desired some of the same information that is there presented graphically, but in a textual format, and instead of encompassing simply a single-day of information at a time, to encompass a user-specified span of days. So, we have a new report to accomplish this purpose.
As you might guess, this new report is accessible from the Reports form (F11). There you should select "Performance - Techs," then "Time Allocations:"
 |
 |
Pick your date range as prompted, and you should see something like the following in result.
Please bear in mind that, like some of our other
recently-added reports, this one too depends on the computer involved having
Excel installed, which is a component of Microsoft Office.
New "Tech-Status" Display in the DispatchMap:
For those of you using SD-Mobile (it's most of you), we've found that many have not known that to see when each of your techs last connected (and which version of SD-Mobile each is running in), you can simply click, within your in-office SD-MobileLink program, on its "Test Connection / Check Link Activity" button. This produces a quick little report, on the details just mentioned.
Of course, the above-described program is only accessible from a single desk (the one which runs the MobileLink program), and we've learned folks at multiple desks would in some instances like to stay informed, throughout each day, as to the status of each tech in terms of informationally connecting with the system. So, we added a new display:
Besides needing this new version of ServiceDesk to deploy, this new feature also requires an update in the MobileLink program to its (currently offered) 1.4.97 or above Version (absent that update the enhanced display in ServiceDesk will show nothing but blanks for the indicated times).
Non-Job "Naked"-Appointments will Now Port to the Tech in Mobile:
In the ServiceDesk ScheduleList form (F6), there has always been the ability to click on the "New" button, and create a straight appointment entry that is not tied to a job. These can be used to put "Vacation" entries into the schedule, for example. Or, to put into the schedule an office meeting that you expect particular techs to attend. Or, to schedule a time for a tech to have his truck serviced, etc. The possibilities are almost endless, and we've determined to call these "naked" appointments because, well, they're not tied to a job. These appointments show up (just as do job-tied appointments) within the DispatchMap, providing a nice, on it's face indication of how each applicable tech will be occupied during the times in question.
When we created the mechanisms in SD-Mobile that pull appointments from ServiceDesk, our thinking was entirely tied to the standard, job-connected appointment scenario, and we neglected to accommodate this other kind. Thus, until now, SD-Mobile has not been displaying these "naked" appointments for the tech.
We realized this oversight early-on, but have been slow to address it because there was an easy, user-based solution. Many companies created one or more fake "jobs," to stand-in for such things as office-meetings, and made appointments for those fake jobs as needed (thus, these show up for the tech in his Mobile interface just fine). Though the expedient has served well, it's nevertheless been a little less than elegant.
The current releases of SD-Mobile and SD-MobileLink (updates in both are needed) address our original oversight. Now, "naked" appointments as made in ServiceDesk will port directly to the tech in Mobile. There is no longer any need to maintain fake jobs, within ServiceDesk, to "clothe" them.
You may note that, directly speaking, it's an improvement in Mobile mechanisms we're announcing here, and, normally, Mobile-side improvements are announced in the SDM-WorkDiary (as opposed to this, the SD-WorkDiary). However, it's within ServiceDesk where you need to know about this improvement, in order to take advantage of it.
Updated SD-Backup Program:
Since long before it was first introduced to the public, ServiceDesk has had a companion program called SD-Backup. It's designed to run in the background from any non-server station in the network, and automatically makes regular backups of ServiceDesk's primary operating data. We highly recommend you have this program rigged to run automatically, at least every day throughout the day, if not (indeed) 24/7.
Having been developed so early, this program had grown
somewhat archaic in comparison to the SD system whose job it's been to
backup. Josh, here, undertook the task to fully update and modernize
this little program. While he's been doing a ton of very sophisticated
web-side programming for us, it's his first foray into programming directly
for the desktop on behalf of Rossware. I think he's done a fine job.
Please update to this latest copy of SD-backup. Unlike ServiceDesk,
the update is not automated. You'll need to go to the ServiceDesk
downloads page, pick the update there, and be sure to unzip to the correct
folder (where you otherwise have ServiceDesk itself installed and running).
This means you may need to change from the default "Unzip-To" path.
Also, please be sure you don't have the old SD-Backup running when you
unzip. If you do, Windows won't allow the old program file (in-use for
the running program) to be replaced.
