Skip to main content

In IQ you cannot approve Conflicts, that are confirming sharing rooms on same times? 

@HLemoine 107790d svsd410 Thank you for submitting your question to our community! 😄 

Two conflicting events cannot be overridden by anyone. However, room availability conflicts can be overridden by an admin. To which are you referring to in your question? 


@HLemoine 107790d svsd410 Just wanted to follow up on this thread! 


@Kathryn Carter Can you explain this more:

Two conflicting events cannot be overridden by anyone. However, room availability conflicts can be overridden by an admin. 

 

What are conflicting events? Two events scheduled in the same room?

What are considered room availability conflicts?

Also as a note, I have never worked with an event scheduling platform that doesn't allow an admin to override and book 2 events in the same room.


@MMascelli 877440b bhbl Let me reword this for clarity.

An end user cannot book two events in the same place at the same time if one of those events is already approved. An admin cannot go into the calendar and schedule an additional event at the same location at the same time on the back end. The admin CAN set an event outside of the booking threshold. I am checking with our events team to see what would be the best practice for this. 😄 I hope this helps in the mean time. 


 @MMascelli 877440b bhbl  Hi there!  @Kathryn Carter is right!

 

The system will not allow ANYONE to schedule two Events at the same time in the same space.  It’s not even possible and there isn’t any override options.  Kathryn is referring to the threshold that you can set on each room-if you were to want a 24 hour lead time before a room could be booked.  That is something an Event admin can override-but ONLY when they are the ones submitting an Event.  With Tickets being what is submitted by Faculty, Staff and External Guests they have no override capabilities of any kind-only Event admins when submitting Events directly.

 

I hope this helps!


@NBurke_iiQ ,

 

Thanks you for the clarification but this seems like a missing core feature. As I mentioned, we have worked with at least three other scheduling softwares that all allowed an admin user or designated group to double book a room, in fact this was a core functionality of the other systems.

I could think of a few simple ways for this to be accomplished:

  1. You could allow for a designated team to override the booking, just like you do for room availability. For this team, a window would pop up and ask if you wanted to allow for a double booking.
  2. You could allow for a room designation when creating a room to be a “multi-space” room and then allow the admin to type in the number of divisions. For example, A gym could be designated as a “multi-space” with 3 partitions

I am sure there would be other ways to accomplish this as well but it certainly seems like a missing feature. While I understand that I can make “dummy rooms” to accomplish this (Gym A, Gym B, Gym C) this make it confusing for users who are already accustomed to room names since we have been using iiq ticketing for the past year. 

Thank you for answering the questions but I hope that this request makes sense.

 


@MMascelli 877440b bhbl I will let my colleague @Kathryn Carter jump in here as #1 I believe would be something for our Idea Exchange as a suggestion if I’m not mistaken, but for #2, we do have many districts that have set up spaces like that already similarly as you mentioned!  You can rename your gyms or spaces whatever you had them as previously, but what I have seen done is Gym-East, Gym-West, Gym-Upper and then use a room type of “Multi-Space Gym”.  Then if someone needs Gym-East, they can just schedule that space, but if someone needs the entire Gym they would have to select all 3 of those spaces.  This has been working well with many other districts who do have divided spaces but we understand it can sometimes be challenging to learn a new systems process.  


Thanks for the work around @NBurke_iiQ for #2!

For #1 - You can add that feedback to our existed idea thread here: 

 


Reply