Home› Service Manager Asset Management Feature Requests
We appreciate you taking the time to vote and add your suggestions to make our products awesome! Your request will be submitted to the community for review and inclusion into the backlog.

We recommend reviewing what is submitted before posting, in case your idea has already been submitted by another community member. If it has been submitted, vote for that existing feature request (by clicking the up arrow) to increase its opportunity of being added to Cireson solutions.

For more information around feature requests in the Cireson Community click here.

New field - SW Asset Approval Level

Jon_RunheimJon_Runheim Customer Adept IT Monkey ✭✭
in Service Manager Asset Management Feature Requests
On the General tab of the SW Asset (for example next to the SW Asset Type field) it would be great if there could be an enum field (SW Asset Approval Level) stating the approval level for the specific SW, ex NoApproval / Mgr-Approval / Mgr-CFO-Approval / etc.. This would be used by a runbook to dynamically create the Review Activities required for the SW Asset as that differs between them.
3
Up Down
3 votes

Submitted · Last Updated

Comments

  • Brett_MoffettBrett_Moffett Cireson PACE Super IT Monkey ✭✭✭✭✭
    Hi Jon,

    Do you see this being a fixed list that would have fixed rule "out-of-the-box"
    Or more of a free list that you could then build rules from within a Request Offering?
  • pzergerpzerger Partner Adept IT Monkey ✭✭
    This is an interesting idea. However, with the use case tied to automation, this scenario might be a good place for a custom class extension to go with the runbook automation scenario in which it would be used. Will give this one some additional consideration.
  • Jon_RunheimJon_Runheim Customer Adept IT Monkey ✭✭
    Personally, I'd rather have a free list that could be tied to automations as required. A suggestion would be to provide automation runbooks  in SCO, etc, as a starting point. To build those automations into the core product could possibly limit the usage scenarios too much.

  • Geoff_RossGeoff_Ross Cireson Consultant O.G.
    Hi John, I have built something exactly like that.



    An extra tab on SW assets covers everything needed for Automation.

    First / Second approver, configurable drop down for an up to two stage approval process. My value are None, Line Manager, Cost Centre Manager, Software Owner and IT. The workflow calculates these users and adds zero, one or two RAs as needed.

    Software Owner / Approver specified the person who approves when software owner is selected in one of the approval stages.

    Required spare license determines if the workflow should check for a spare licence of if this isn't need for this software eg a true-up model. If it is needed and there are no spare, the workflow creates an MA for the Licence Admin to purchase an extra licence.

    Deployment Method, a drop down list for how the software gets out to the user. Options are Manual Install (MA for Service Desk to install using Deployment Method Details as path to install files), Citrix (puts AD user into AD group specified in Deployment Method Details), SCCM (add's User Primary Device to SCCM Collection specified in Deployment Method Details) and SaaS (creates MA for Software Owner to add an account for this user). Once approval and licence is sorted, a second runbook fires to take care of this stage.

    Let me know if you want to discuss further or any assistance setting something similar up.

    Geoff

     
  • Jon_RunheimJon_Runheim Customer Adept IT Monkey ✭✭
    Hi Geoff,

    We've built a similar setup, but are using the built-in field of SW Type for the approval process choice.

    We've automated the implementation type completely based on having AD groups for all SW, which have the SW Assets name in the Description field. The runbook then does a cross-check between these and identifies where to put the user or the computer. If it is a computer deployment (identified base on that the group name has -SCCM- in it, then the runbook gets the SCCM collection from the AD groups Notes field and uses that to traverse into SCCM and populate that directly as well.

    Your extra tab (or something similar) would be great to have ootb in the product to make the it more usable.
    The deployment details section you have would also be very useful for specific info that should be passed to the Service Desk or installer.

    Thanks for the very good ideas!
Sign In or Register to comment.