KB Submissions what role is needed to Create Article?

Vickie Runyon · ‎01-30-2020

We are using Knowledge Submissions workflow to build our knowledge base. When an INC is closed, the agent checks the Knowledge box on the Resolution section and a Submission is then created when the INC closes.

We have a number of agents granted the knowledge role and they can create KB Articles from the Knowledge, Edit option. However, these same agents do not see the Create Article option in the Submission as I do (I'm admin).

What role or ACL or whatever is needed to allow them to create articles via the Submission? I have searched ServiceNow docs & have not found any reference to this.

Michael Ritchie · ‎01-30-2020

Vickie, when curious about what roles are required it is best to look at the ACLs on the table for the answer.

I navigated to Knowledge \ Articles \ Open Submissions
From the list I click one of the Column "hamburgers" and chose Configure \ Security Rules
I then scrolled to find a record with operation of create and right clicked on the word "create" and choose Show Matching
Other than the default * (deny) ACLs there is one for the kb_submission table
Clicking into it will tell you that the "knowledge_admin" role is required to create a kb_submission record

Looking at the Create Article UI Action on the submission table, the condition is "current.canCreate()" which invokes/checks the above ACL so users without the knowledge_admin role won't be able to create an article.

Not sure that I agree with this condition so you could modify the condition to include one of your roles.

View solution in original post

Nguyen Vuong Ph · ‎02-14-2023

Another way by adding knowledge role in condition of UI Action "Create Article" in KB_Submission form : current.canCreate() || gs.hasRole('knowledge');. It also inhibit knowledge role creating the KB_Submission

Michael Ritchie · ‎01-30-2020

Allen, there is an optional process to force new articles through a "submission" process instead of directly into a knowledgebase. This optional process has been in the platform since 2011 when I started using it. The "glide.knowman.submission.workflow" system property turns it on and off as mentioned here:

https://docs.servicenow.com/bundle/orlando-it-service-management/page/product/incident-management/ta...

Vickie Runyon · ‎01-30-2020

We tried using the other method where the INC information was automatically dumped into a draft KB article. We found it to be nearly useless as it puts ALL the comments in the text of the article - when you only need just that one Work Note where the meat of the resolution is held.

Using the Submission process allows for vetting of the INC record first to verify that enough details are present to even create an article. Then, we can copy/paste from the INC to create an article where it makes sense.

Looking forward to even more KCS enhancements in future versions of ServiceNow to make this even easier!

Allen Andreas · ‎01-30-2020

Great.

Yea, that sounds like perhaps a cleaner way that what I've seen before. I'm not really big in to knowledge articles and such, but what I was referring to was the exact same thing...draft article is created and then usually owners of that KB would look it over to see if it should be an article or not. Definitely can agree that a dump of comments can be "useless", but you can easily remove those out.

Anyways, glad you got your answer and as alluded to in my initial reply...they would at a minimum need the Knowledge role.

Take care!

Please consider marking my reply as Helpful and/or Accept Solution, if applicable. Thanks!

Michael QCKM · ‎02-03-2020

I had heard from Sarup Paul (When I was looking into enabling Submissions in 2017) that they were doing away with Submissions in favor of some other method. Has anyone else heard of Submissions continuing? I liked it because it put new contributions from non-Author types into another workflow, keeping them seperate from newly created "Drafts".

ServiceNow, can you please confirm or deny that this Submissions workflow will be supported moving forward?