Managing resources in the new Resource Management Workspace

[EWood]

Hello,

I am looking for guidance on maintaining accurate resource allocation data in the new ServiceNow Resource Management Workspace.  We migrated to Zurich last week and have the new Project and Resource Management Modules.

What is the ServiceNow best practice for managing resources who leave a project early (or that do not need to be on the project for its entirety) in the new Resource Management Workspace? With the removal of the "Complete Resource Plan" process, how should resource managers update allocations to accurately reflect that a resource is no longer engaged on the project?

Here are a few examples:

1) A testing coordinator might be needed at the beginning of a project for a few hours and then not again until the very end.  Do we enter two separate requests?

2) A resource request was submitted for a testing coordinator for a period of time, but they are no longer needed.  How do we "complete" that plan to release that resource's time?

Any guidance is appreciated.

Thank you.

[Chris Cannella]

Hello EWood, 

I do want to note that if you are only changing the end dates of resource assignments, the need to sync should not be triggered.  Syncing of resources should only happen when you modify the start or end date of a project task, and that change impacts resource assignment start or end dates.  
If you are being asked to sync after changing the end date of a resource assignment, please submit a ticket.  That should not happen. 

-Chris

[nisensee]

Hello, I have a similar question. We just transitioned to Resource Management Workspace over the weekend. We now have a long report of resource assignments with end dates in the past, in the state of "Allocated." Is action needed to close those? Or does the system assume that any resource assignment with an end date in the past is complete?

[Chris Cannella]

Hello, 

To start, I fully agree with the answer posted by PaulaaO to the original two questions.

For your specific question, the short answer is that you do not need to worry about resource assignments in the past that are allocated. 

With resource plans, the assignment would move from table to table as it progressed (typically ending with a state of allocated).  With resource assignments we made a change so that all assignment are created on the allocated table (which you would see as a state of allocated in certain legacy reports). 

With resource assignments, we have default approval states that can change, but the assignment never moves from table to table.  This was done to give you as the customer the flexibility to decide which process to follow or which approval states to use. 

The business logic behind this is that some customers want a flexible process while others want the same process we had with resoruce plans, while others want even more rigor and auditing states. 

By way of example, some customers only want to change approval states when there is a conflict or over utilization situation - otherwise they want to leave the state in pending.  Some customers want to be much more explicit and they can either use the default states (pending, approved, disapproved) or they can add their own states (completed, soft booked, hard booked, etc.) and then set a rule around which states will draw against a resources capacity.

Regardless of rules or state, once the end of the assignment is in the past it will not count against capacity. 

I hope this helps,

Chris