Best approach to add CANCEL on REQUESTED ITEM

cspra
Giga Expert

Hello,

Currently, I don't see any OOB CANCEL UI Action in REQUESTED ITEM level.  Our requirement is to include this UI and introduce a 'justification' field to be used later in the Notification.

So need advise from experts here. 🙂

Would you suggest the better approach and things to consider in applying this customization? 

Thanks.

7 REPLIES 7

You can always set the stage field (if that is what you refer to) with the same UI Action.

Otherwise you can do it in the workflow as well.
Add a wait for wf-event activity that will wait as soon as the workflow starts. When you cancel the ritm, triggar aworkflow event and send it to the workflow where you have your activity waiting for this event. It will then proceed to the next stage in the workflow where you can set an activity to do something and also set stage to cancelled.

You can read about how to trigger such an event in the API
https://developer.servicenow.com/app.do#!/api_doc?v=kingston&id=r_WF-broadcastEvent_S_S

 

Please mark as Helpful/Correct if this helps or solve the problem.

Not applicable

Hi,

Apart from the solution given by palmen, also refer the following link, This may be helpful for Request cancellation, Incident cancellation and Change cancellation.

Canceling a Service Catalog Request

Thanks

Regards
Ajay

 

find_real_file.png

www.dxsherpa.com

adrianps
Kilo Expert

(I love the smell of thread necromancy in the morning)

Related to the OP's question, I've created a UI Action called "Cancel Item".  This action sets the sc_req_item.state = 7 (closed skipped).

The puzzling thing is that there is another action that immediately changes the state from closed_skipped to closed_incomplete.

I've pored through the business rules  to try and find the culprit but with no success.

Has anyone else come across this behaviour?

(fyi, I spun up an OOTB London instance and copied in my Cancel Item UI Action and I've been able to reproduce the behaviour, so there is something that really doesn't like an sc_req_item record being stored in a closed_skipped state...)

In the meantime I'll keep digging but I'd appreciate if anyone else could shed some light on this.

Cheers,

Adrian