Tickets

I wanted to see if there’s a way to schedule daily reports for tickets. I’ve been asked to figure out a way to give my department lead a daily report of our team’s open tickets. I know how to create the report, but I want to know if there’s a way to schedule one to be created daily and emailed. Thanks!

“Issue found, it was an old approval workflow that allowed them to work tickets and the users inquestion where accidently taking their own tickets.”  I have come across an issue, I have a small number of tickets that users are somehow creating and after they are created, it shows them as the agent and the status of the ticket is changed from submitted to in progress. They currently are all under the staff role.  I have not been able to replicate the issue and cannot find anthing in the timeline or rules that would be causing it to happen.   Does anyone have any thoughts on this? 

Anyone else noticing that emails are not coming from IIQ this afternoon, April 16th?  We have submitted a ticket but just wondering if others are seeing the same thing.  

I am new to iiQ and am the Inventory Secretary for our school districts Maintenance Facility.  I enter invoice data information for All purchases our department makes.  (We previously came from School Dude/Asset Essentials) I know how to enter parts inventory but am searching for a way to enter any purchases (not a part) made for a work order ticket to be listed.  Besides just entering into the action notes field is there a way to set custom fields such as Invoice Date, Number, Cost, Vendor and Who Purchased to my ticket progress?  Anyone else have this available to them?

Hi there! I’m trying to create a new rule in our iiQ stack that will allow for an email to be sent to the ticket submitter or on behalf of after we change the status of a device to decommissioned. So far I have created the rule and tested it but I’m not getting anywhere with success. I have used the AI Chatbot throughouly but am at the point that I am running in circles. Below is a picture of the rule in its current state, any help is much appreciated!! 

Is there a way to force a ticket to start/get assigned to an agent if we put a comment in a ticket? I thought this was happening in my previous district, but it’s equally likely I was just in the habit of hitting “start” every single time.

We have a team set up called “Assistive Technology” which allows a couple specific non-IT staff members to handle tickets related to IEP/SPED devices within IIQ, when tickets are assigned to the team. These users are assigned the staff role, not agent, because otherwise they’d be able to see/work all tickets in IIQ rather than just tickets assigned to the team. We’re seeing a few issues with using the delegated team permissions:Team members cannot see or create internal comments/comments not visible to requestor Team members don’t have the option to change the ticket’s status to “Waiting on requestor” when creating a comment Team members aren’t seeing all the ticket timeline itemsSee the below images for a comparison of what I see as an agent vs. what the 2 staff users see as a delegated team member to the ticket.

Basically the problem we have in our district is that devices going missing happens often, but it can be a short-lived occurrence. Our librarians are very good at setting the asset status to “Missing”, which triggers a device lock, but they tend not to create tickets because the devices are often found within hours or even minutes of being locked therefore they don’t want to deal with ticket hassle.The problem this presents to us is we don’t have a good recorded history of how often any given student loses a device, which can be detrimental when discipline/remediation is required. I feel automating lost device ticket creation would be a win-win, librarians don’t have to do the extra work, but we’d still have a trail of who is losing what to support admins when needed. IIQ’s asset rules currently don’t allow for ticket creation based on device status for some reason. So I’m just wondering if anyone has found a workaround to this shortcoming, or what’s your approach. Tha

Currently - our agents work tickets and use a resolution action called “Escalate to SysAdmin” to assign the ticket to our SysAdmin team for review. The team would like some baseline information gathered FIRST before accepting the ticket. Here is the template:User: [Teacher Name / Username]Hostname: [e.g., FCS-SerialNumber]MAC Address: [00:00:00:00:00:00]IP Address: [10.xx.xx.xx]Attachments: [Screenshot of Error] & [Screen Recording of Glitch]I do not see a way to “require” the template to be filled out prior to performing a resolution action such as “escalate to SysAdmin team” Please add this feature and we have several teams that would like the information gathered FIRST prior to escalation.

I am sorry to have to put this here but the ability to submit a support ticket in our platform has disappeared.  There is no little icon in the lower right to open a support ticket.   Also out ticket templates that are set to run on a schedule have not run in over a week.  Looking through my list of templates they all have the next run date as a date in the past like the example attached to this post.  Is there a way support can reach out to me to look into this.  I did not know if there was a support email I could use.  

We have a rule that sends us emails when a ticket has been responded too. But I like working off of the Ticket View. Is there a way to have some kind of icon to in the ticket views that show that there has been a response to a ticket?This is would be helpful when I look at the tickets “Assigned to Me”. I would like to quickly identify when a ticket requestor has responded. At this moment, I have to look at every ticket.  In the old ticketing system, the ticket subject would show in bold and I would check all tickets that were in bold. Once I responded they would go back  to regular font.This just made it a lot easier to keep up with responses.

Is there a way to hide specific issues under Models? If there is I cannot find it. I can choose to only allow agents to see specific issues on all the other tabs, but not under Models. This causes us to put a lot of stuff under the Other Requests section because there are things we don’t want regular users to see. Being able to edit the issues visibility on Models would be a huge help to us!

Hi All, When I add my co-workers as followers to my tickets, I always click “Yes” on the “Do you want to notify the user that they have been added as a follower?” question before doing so.I have noticed that this does not really notify the user, it rather just starts to send them ticket update information (via email, which is our preferred notification method).Is there a way I can get this to actually notify a person that they were added as a follower (again, via email), and then provide them ticket update information rather than just start receiving ticket updates?

Is there a way I can create tickets with ticket templates via email submission rule?

Is there a way to reference a purchase order in a ticket that is NOT related to parts.  For example, if someone submitted a helpdesk ticket to purchase a desktop computer, could I link that ticket to a purchase order in some way? 

We’ve noticed that when our agents get email notifications about tickets, new tickets, updates, etc. in the fields showing the updates the text isn’t formatted with line breaks.  Instead it is all put together with text wrapping.  On longer tickets where there are paragraphs in the ticket is just one big wall of text making it all very hard to read.Considering how many things IIQ does great I find it hard to believe that something as simple as properly formatting the emails is something they can’t do.  Are we missing a setting or something that would resolve this?

I tried to search through the community posts here but wasn’t able to find anything related to this. I get a permissions issue when trying to import models, do you know what might be going on? I’ve included a screenshot of the error.  I have the default IIQ Administrator role and have imported models on this account previously. I’m reposting this ticket because I think I initially put it in the wrong section.  

Hoping to get some clarification on stale tickets, specifically how the stale ticket count works and what triggers the stale ticket to reset.We currently have ‘Waiting on Requestor’ rules in place that send reminders to our requestors when a ticket has been sitting in that status for a specified amount of time. When each rule is triggered, it is suppose to change the status from ‘Waiting on Requestor’ to our custom reminder 1, 2, 3, etc. I understood that this rule would count how long the ticket sat at the specified status, and then trigger the next rule. However, we’re finding that the statuses aren’t changing.It seems like the stale count is resetting when the ticket is simply touched (opened) even though no changes are being made within. Is anyone else experincing this issue, or have any suggestions to fix this?Screenshot of one of the current rules...maybe we’re doing something wrong?

How are you going about being notified of New Tickets other than logging into and living in IIQ all day?We don’t auto assign tickets quite yet, as there are only two of us, and we try to prioritize them and work them as we get them.  I have noticed, that when new tickets are submitted by my users, that neither of us get email notifications.  The only way either of us know about a new ticket is if we look for new tickets in IIQ.I don’t see an option for “Ticket Creation” notifications for Agents in the Site Settings.  What is the best practice here?Thank you all in advance for your help. 

Is there a way to have the Subtask list update based on the ticket created rule > create subtask list when ticket issue is changed? For example, I had a requestor put the wrong ticket issue in, when I change to the correct issue, the subtask list based on that rule is not generated.

Hey guys,If I create a rule in IQ for tickets, will it run for all existing tickets as well? I want to add a “stale ticket” rule where the priority will increase based on how long the ticket has been stale. I would like the rule to start as it’s created, not for previously stale tickets.

It has been brought to my attention that when another agent closes a ticket for someone else it gives the credit to the assigned agent not the agent that resolves the ticket.  Is there a way to fix it so that the system is set to give credit to the resolving agent?  When I run report on agent performance the numbers do not reflect what agents are really doing.

We are looking to implement Fee Tracker in our IIQ tenant. How does your district handle automation with Fee Tracker and IT Ticketing? We are looking for a robust way for principals/administrative assistants to be added as followers whenever there is a fee update to a ticket. Cheers!

I would like to pull all ticket data from this year into a Google Sheet (nightly) so I can create custom reports. Anyone know how to do this using Google Apps script and an API call? Thanks.

I accidentally returned a spare asset on a ticket that I was updating because the spare asset had NOT been returned. Is there a “best practice” way of undoing this action?(I tried deleting the “return spare” action, which did delete the action, but the asset is now no longer associated with the ticket, other than in the reference in the “issue spare” action in the timeline.)(Somewhat relatedly, is there a way of backdating actions that are entered absent-mindedly after the fact? Clearly this would be something to avoid.)