Can the "Changes to" operator, be used in conjunction with dotwalking? SLA related

[CMH]

Hi All,

I am building a SLA definition, using the extended operators "Changes", "Changes From" and "Changes to", but I cant seem to get the SLA Definition to trigger at all - even with the most basic conditions.

So my start condition is super simple:

Priority=2

Assignment Group.Parent "Changes to" XXXXX (where XXXXX is a valid parent group)

So I then create a P2 incident, assigned to a group that has either no parent, or has a parent group of YYYY. I then reassign the incident to a group that does have parent=XXXXX, but the SLA will not trigger at all 😞

I am wondering if it is actually somehow impossible, in a SLA Definition to use "changes to" with a dotwalk.

I also tried some other flavours, using "Changes" and "Changes From", but can't seem to get the SLA to attach.

Did any manage to get this to work in their SNOW instance?

Many thanks all!

(P.S. I know dot-walking is not recommended in a SLA definition, I am aware of that - I am focussed only on the question of Changes To combined with a dotwalk. Also, I know that the extended operators are not enabled by default in the SLA module - but I have a use case where I see no other option)

[CMH]

Hi Robert, thanks for responding,

My problem is that one parent group has many assignment groups underneath. We need to start/stop SLA tasks when an incident becomes assigned to one of these “family” of groups or when the incident leaves the “family”. We don’t want any SLA to trigger/stop if an incident moves between groups within this family.

It’s because the SLA performance of the “family”/Provider is measured as a whole,  it per individual group.

example: if group1 in the “family” responds to an incident (completing the response SLA), then they have to reassign it to group2 (also in the family), we do t want another response SLA to be triggered.

We can’t use the incident state though, because tickets can be passed between family and non-family without the state changing.

its a tough one. Our SNOW team is very resistant to customisation, so I am trying to find a way to solve it with the “out of the box” options

[Robert H]

Hello @CMH ,

Thank you for the additional details.

Have you tried the following configuration (replace "Database" with your own parent group of the "family of groups").

This is how it will behave:

Scenario 1

1. New P2 Incident gets assigned to a group that is not part of the "family" (for example a Network group) => Database response SLA does not trigger
2. Incident gets reassigned to "Chicago Database" group (but not to a person; State remains New) => Database response SLA starts
3. Incident gets assigned to a person (this changes State to In progress automatically) => Database response SLA completes
4. Incident gets reassigned to "New York Database" group (but not a person) => no new SLA starts

Scenario 2

1. As above, New P2 Incident gets assigned to the Network group => Database SLA does not trigger
2. As above, Incident gets reassigned to "Chicago Database" group but not to a person => Database response SLA starts
3. Incident gets reassigned to the Network group => Database response SLA gets cancelled

To me this sounds exactly like what you have described.

Regards,

Robert

[CMH]

Hi Robert, ah thank you, but unfortunately not, because of what I wrote about the reason we cannot rely on the state of the ticket: 

“We can’t use the incident state though, because tickets can be passed between family and non-family without the state changing.”

so for example, if our service desk have the ticket first (state=new) and they work on it, they will set the ticket to “in-progress”. The ticket might then be reassigned to the “family” if the desk can fix it. Unfortunately the state of the ticket does not automatically change to “new”… therefore the SLA start condition would not be met. I think this is normal out-of-the-box behaviour,

sincerely

CMH

[Robert H]

Hello @CMH ,

Thanks for the additional clarifications. I understand the issue now. I agree it's really tricky, but I'll try to think of something.

Can you please clarify one more thing: I understand that you don't want a new SLA to be triggered when the Incident gets passed from a "family" group to another group in that "family". What if, in between, it gets assigned to a "non-family" group, so again taking my example groups: Chicago Database => Network => New York Database? Shall the last reassignment trigger another Database response SLA?

Regards,

Robert

[CMH]

Hi Robert,

thanks for helping me with this, yes if the ticket leaves the family and then comes back to the family, a new response SLA should be attached,

sincerely 

CMH