Idea Details

new non-license role required

Last activity 09-28-2018 11:37 AM
Anon Anon's profile image
05-16-2012 12:33 PM

We have an issue where there are far too many Analysts in our database. This stems from users needing visibility of more data than is possible through Employee role, but at the same time, the users never handle tickets or create kb document.

 

Most of these users actually just require read-only access to the data, using the search faciliities. It's frustrating that we currently have to use an Analyst license when they're really not taking advantage of 90% of the product's capabilities.

 

I think there should be another role, that allows some of the functionality described, but does not use a license. Currently our only other work-around is to write our own reports based on Service Desk data.


Comments

09-28-2018 11:37 AM

While we have been considering creating an additional business user role that allows users to see/submit other's tickets from the self-service interface, this requirement seems a bit different.

 

Given that our licensing model is based upon concurrent usage, are you finding that this management role is being used to an extent that it is impacting your license availability?

03-17-2017 12:21 PM

Thank you for submitting this idea. The product team is reviewing this idea and is looking for additional input from other community members.

 

Community Members: If you agree that this is a good idea, please vote and add comments with details about your requirements.

03-15-2017 06:32 AM

I totally agree with the example -- We have many managers defined as analysts and members of their team's group(s) just so they can log in anytime and see all of the details for the tickets that are assigned to their team members. 

 

To go along with this though, we also needed to make our employee access type licensed for 2 reasons:  1) We need them to also be able to see tickets where they are the requester.  2) We need anyone who is sent a manual notify email from a ticket (could be the affected end user's manager, for example) to be able to reply to that email and update the ticket.  So it would also be nice to have the flexibility to define both a manager access type and employee access type that can only view tickets via the interface, but can update any ticket via email reply without needing to be licensed. 

 

Tammy

03-15-2017 05:19 AM

let give you a real live example that support this idea.

in our environment Manager's have a need to be aware(read only ) of all ticket submitted by their employee under their department/organization.

there is no need for them to access the analyst interface, but only the simple employee interface or USS.

We created a access type for them and corresponding data partition but the only way for now to finally accomplish this was to flag them as licensed causing an important extr cost for no reall added value except the one listed above.

 

Will really make more sense to have licenses based on the interface the user have access to vs. data

 

/J

02-01-2016 04:03 PM

Robert,

 

I am going through older Ideas that are still categorized as 'New' to understand how others are using the components and perhaps find workarounds or duplicates.

 

It sounds to me as if your use case for these contacts is a 'Reporting' access type.  They would only have read-only access but otherwise be able to use all the search and Scoreboard abilities as the 'Analyst' access type?

 

Do you use the CA BI (BOXI) reporting tools or some other reporting outside the SDM web interface?  If not, why?  Does the SDM web interface provide all the reporting needs for these 'Reporting' access types or would you need more customizations?

 

CA is reviewing reporting requirements and there is/was a reports survey available for SDM customers.

 

J.W.

07-25-2013 12:55 AM

I agree with the same. Additionally there are analysts who just use request/incident management and never Change and Config.  Licensing mechanism can also we weighted based on the modules used.