Tickets

Is there a way to customize the initial 5 Ticket Types in the ticket creation menu?

How can I keep a ticket from opening back after the requestor add a comment? 

All,I am hoping there might be a way to pull a snapshot of the Analytics Explorer that is interactive in the way it is within iiq, externally for presentations?   Or other options other than a static image or pdf. Thank you

We recently purchased Schoolpass and I’m trying to add it under “Software / online systems” but I’m unsure how to create a custom piece of software. Any help would be appreciated! 

We’re looking to automate the creation of a “Repair Request” ticket after the resolution of an “Issue” ticket and need to link a singular asset between the two. Our current broken device workflow is that we have spare devices at each school that, when a staff member/student brings in a broken device, are checked out and become the user’s new primary device. In this case, we have our “Issue” ticket being created and resolved when the student/staff member gets their new device from the spares, but we need a “Repair Request” to then be created and assigned to our repair team since the device is still broken, but the original “Issue” is resolved. We have tags created to designate these ticket types, a basic ticket template, and a rule that already automatically fires the creation. However, I can’t figure out a way to link the original asset from the original “Issue” ticket to the new “Repair Request.” Is there any way this is currently possible?

Hello everyone!  My name is Juan and I wanted to ask if it was possible to assign different agents during the ticket procedure.  As an example, I’m a checkout specialist for my district and my duties require me to research and approve if students can check out devices.  I usually look at their IIQ account and check to see if there’s a history of incidental damage and repeated fees.  After I research this information we’ve typically used a Google Sheet to track our activity during the month.  Once I’ve done my part it is then up to our techs to either repair or assign replacement devices when they personally go to buildings throughout our district.  Can I hand off the ticket and assign it to another user without losing any of the history assigned to that ticket?  If so, what are the proper step to follow?  Thanks everyone.  

Is there away to apply a newly created rule to existing tickets. After receiving a few tickets and going in to add subtask we created a rule to create those subtask on new tickets. Is there a way to add those new subtask to those existing tickets without having to go through each one and create them?

I have a dilemma which may require the collective brainpower of this community to figure out how to solve it. Currently, when a new contractor is being brought into a school, the office manager creates a contractor onboarding ticket,  The parent ticket has required fields like name, role, start date, end date - those fields are mapped to sub-tickets. The parent ticket is assigned to the building tech to deploy devices and the sub-tickets are for tasks like assigning badge access and adding the contractor to Campus (which triggers an automated account provisioning process).  This all works beautifully. Here’s my dilemma.  Once the building tech resolves the parent ticket, we don’t have a mechanism for knowing when the end date is approaching so we can arrange to get the devices back.  I suppose the building tech could put the ticket on hold and add the end date to the ticket subject and then watch their queue for when that date is near.   That ticket could be in their q

I’m new to IncidentIQ so forgive me for asking simple questions… I’m an admin that wants to “jump” into an email conversation between the agent and the user concerning a ticket…  a simple “has this been resolved”? and I want to make sure it’s in the email chain on the ticket itself… is there an easy way to do that …? I’m not the agent or the requestor and I can’ figure out how to butt myself into the conversation 

Hey guys! What’s the best way to submit tickets on multiple assets simultaneously?Ex. multiple Chromebooks have damaged keyboards.

We are looking to have the functionality to show tickets that have all completed subtickets or don’t have subtickets at all. Is there a way to change what operator a filter is using in the View Designer?

I am still kind of new to all of this, and had a few questions with rules.So can we force a rule to run after a ticket has already been made? a. We have a ticket where the rule didn’t populate the subtickets, even though it is set up like every other rule we have that is working just fine at populating these. I don’t know if it just glitched and is not populating, but it would be awesome if I could force the rule to run, just to see if it would work after the ticket has been made. Is there a way to have subtasks populate on a subticket that goes from one platform to another? a. We have an onboarding ticket that goes from HR to Ticketing, and the subtasks that we have in the rule do not translate over into the Ticketing side. I have added them, and they still don’t show up. I didn’t know if this just isn’t actually possible, or if I am just doing it wrong. Thank you all!

Is it possible to setup IncidentIQ to bypass the out of box formula where end users need to select a ticket type and then a specific issue and then fill in required information. I would like to have two ticket types (one for Technology and one for Facilities) and then take them right to a form where they can fill in the subject and then the details of their issue. 

I would like to create a set of tasks to be completed when a new student user is created in incidentIQ. For each new user, the workflow needs to:Assign ticket to team A, who will Assign a device, then Assign ticket to team B, who will Confirm user account has been added to proper groups Confirm correct email data in SIS and FinalForms (data entry) Verify the student has been assigned a schedule so account syncing begins successfully Resolve ticketI have a rule that is triggered when a new user is added and attached a ticket template. I added those steps as “resolution actions” in a ticket template, but that appears to represent things that are already complete, rather than steps to be done. What is the best approach for this task?   

Is there a way to change the ticket starting number sequence.  We are up to 42000 in our old system and the new implementation of iiq is starting from 1000, it would make looking back in email and history easier if we could not repeat the number, perhaps start at 50000 or something like that.

We are using the Remote Support Ticketing landing page as a more simplified view for our users to report issues. In the past, when using the “Guest” portion of this page a verification code was not required. However, now that is a required step for users, even if they have a matching account in IIQ via a directory sync.This causes a few issues for us:Not all students have an active E-Mail account, therefore, not all students are able to submit a request. In the past this was not required. That means now staff and students with e-mail addresses will have to enter in a verification code to submit a ticket, adding extra steps. If the user is trying to report an issue with accessing E-Mail, they would also be unable to provide this code. Even if a user has an account in IIQ, they are treated as a Guest when using Remote Support Ticketing. If this can’t be disabled we would need to update our training / steps for all staff and students to eit

Hello,Is there a way to add an Issue Category to the Software / Online Systems Ticket type and have it appear at the top of the page above where it says ‘Which software or online system is this related to?  I was unable to find a guide for this Ticket Type so can you please share if you are aware of one? Additionally the search box isn’t working.  Anything that I type in the box comes up with ‘No results found’.

When an agent is out unexpectedly how do you take them out of a rotation so they do not get automatically assigned tickets? 

Hi friends,Our district is defining service level agreements (SLAs) as they pertain to cybersecurity incidents.This is an important topic for us—and many other schools—as we build out a more robust cybersecurity response plan.We are looking for a means by which, if an SLA in iiQ is breached, affected ticket(s) will be auto-escalated to another user or team.For example:End-user submits iiQ ticket about potential malware on their device. SLA defines any cybersecurity threat as requiring an agent response within 48 hours. If agent does not respond to ticket within 48 hours, then SLA has been breached: Automatically escalate ticket to security team (admin) for review. Is there anything in iiQ’s rules engine that can help us achieve this? I see a condition called “SLA Response Time”, though I’m not sure what other information I would plug in here to achieve the desired results

I have an agent who is receiving email notifications about every ticket submitted, including the ones that are not for his department. Can you help me resolve this issue?

Users can submit a ticket notifying us that they will be traveling aboard and would like their accounts to work outside the US. When submitting their ticket, they fill out “Leave” and a “Return” custom fields. These custom fields have the Field type: Date.I’m writing a Scheduled rule that checks the “Issue type” and “Date Returning” fields. If the return date was last week, an email should be send an email to the assigned Agent letting them know to remove the user from the group allowing outside the US access.However, the scheduled rule appears to ignore the “Date Returning” value. It says the rule will match with 58 tickets which is the total number of tickets with this Issue Type, not the number with the Return Date.Any thoughts on why this doesn’t work?

How do you assign a certain type of ticket to automatically be assigned to a particular agent? Example: JCAMPU or ALIO tickets to auto assigned to one particular agent.

Is it possible when a Ticket is being submitted, for there to be a way for the end user to have more control over the priority level? I know this can be customized in the rules and applied after the work order is submitted to modify the priority based on an attribute, but it’d be beneficial if the user could have more control than just an Urgent toggle. Like maybe a priority drop down that has the options Low, Medium, High, Critical. I find that users may choose Urgent, when they would have been satisfied with choosing Medium or High. I’d like for Urgent to be more reserved for true Critical type scenarios.

We’re new to iiQ as of this year, and we want to import our outstanding and paid invoices into the Square module in Incident IQ so we can see if a student paid the technology fee when they pick up their device. Since we finished our onboarding to iiQ a little late in our enrollment process, we couldn’t invoice through Incident IQ. Is there any way to import all of our existing invoices into the Square module in iiQ? 

I am hoping I’m overlooking something. Is there really no way to filter by the manufacturer. I created a custom field for tickets that I need to show up for any Lenovo device repair. I’m having to select all the Lenovo models we have which isn’t great because when we add new Lenovo devices to our environment we’ll need to come update these custom fields, rules, etc.