Peter, that's a valid point, but he said that the user's information is already in the survey - from the Incident. That is what prompted my initial question of why they needed further validation of that user's identity.
Rick On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 7:33 AM, Lammey, Peter A. <[email protected]>wrote: > ** > What if the user really felt that the services provided were very > unsatisfactory and that was highlighted by their survey results and > management wanted to the organization to contact the user (if they elect to > by some means) to clarify what their expectation was that was not met. > > Most of the time people dont even fill out a survey so there may not be > many to sift through that are submitted in say a month. > But for the people that took the time to fill out the survey and indicated > that they were quite unsatisfied with the service provided, it might be > helpful for management to contact that person directly and find out exactly > where things went wrong and assure them that they will rectify the problems > they experienced so that any future services that they request will go much > smoother. > > I know that if I switch to say a different internet provider or new cable > provider at home and I experience all kinds of issues, if I took the time to > fill a survey out indicating how dissatisfied I was with the service and if > I elected to get a callback then I may like the personal attention that > cable provider or internet provider gave me to hear about my experience and > what they are going to do to rectify the issue for the future. > > Thanks > Peter Lammey > ESPN IT Packaging and Automation > 860-766-4761 > > > ------------------------------ > *From:* Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto: > [email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Rick Cook > *Sent:* Wednesday, May 05, 2010 10:17 AM > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: Windows UserID > > ** > OK, let me see if I can be more clear in my objections. > > Your management, for some unexplained reason, wants to know who is filling > out the surveys. You are trying to satisfy that requirement technically. I > am trying to address it from a business perspective, and that almost always > starts with the question "Why?". > > The only reason I can guess for that is that they want to be sure that the > person filling it out is the person to whom it was directed. Let's look at > three factors in that. > > - How valuable is knowing who actually filled out the survey, from a > practical standpoint? What will be done with those metrics, if anything? > - What are the chances of accidental misuse? > - Since the surveys are only sent to the person who is supposed to > have them, making it pretty difficult for User2 to even know that a > survey > is available for User1. It would be MORE work for someone to try to > answer > someone else's survey than to just do the ones they get sent, and most > people don't even fill THOSE out. So practically speaking, there is > very > little chance of an accidental misuse of the survey. > - What is the likelihood of intentional misuse? > - Are they concerned that there will be an epidemic of people taking > surveys for other people? Do they think their people have so little to > do > that they will spend even free time spoofing other users to fill out > their > surveys? If so, they have a bigger problem than satisfying this > requirement > could possibly address. So the likelihood of intentional misuse is > again, effectively zero. > > So my analysis is that what they *might* gain by the satisfaction of this > requirement seems insignificant compared to the work of satisfying it. I > fail to see ANY worthwhile business justification for this requirement, and > in the absence of same, as a developer, I would reject it for that reason > alone until it is better thought through by the business leaders. > > Rick > > On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 5:45 AM, Veeral Oza <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> ** >> Hi Rick, >> >> The ticket data is available and the requester details are populated in >> the survey. However, there is also a requirement to capture windows login id >> of the user submitting the survey. >> >> Regards, >> Veeral >> >> >> > On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 6:10 PM, Rick Cook <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> How about prepopulating the userid from the ticket when the survey is >> created? If that data is unavailable, how would the survey be directed >> appropriately? >> >> >> Rick >> ------------------------------ >> *From: *Veeral Oza <[email protected]> >> *Date: *Wed, 5 May 2010 18:07:31 +0530 >> *To: *<[email protected]> >> *Subject: *Re: Windows UserID >> >> ** >> Forgot to mention environment: >> >> ARS 7.0 >> ITSM 7.0.3 >> Midtier: 7 on Apache-Tomcat on a Windows machine. >> Oracle 11g database. >> >> >> On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 6:05 PM, Veeral Oza <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> I am stuck at this requirement and was wondering if this is feasible to >>> implement: >>> >>> 1) When an Incident is resolved, an email goes to the customer to submit >>> a survey, with a survey link. >>> 2) The link opens the survey form in the brower without the user >>> authenticating in the midtier. A surver-user with a restricted read license >>> is created for this purpose which allows multiple people from multiple >>> locations to submit the survey. >>> 3) There is a submit button on this survey form. >>> 4) When the user clicks on submit button, it is required that, his >>> Windows User ID be captured in one of the fields. >>> _______________________________ >>> >>> Solutions implemented that did not work: >>> 1) >>> Create a little Java function in a .jsp file and put it in your "shared" >>> folder on your Midtier: >>> >>> Name the file something like /arsys/shared/get_remote_user.jsp. >>> >>> get_remote_user.jsp contains: >>> >>> function env_ip_var() >>> { >>> var return_value = "<%=request.getRemoteUser()%>"; >>> return (return_value) >>> } >>> >>> In the Web Header content of the form you want to capture this on, >>> add... >>> >>> <SCRIPT src="/arsys/shared/get_remote_user.jsp" >>> language="JavaScript"></SCRIPT> >>> >>> To set a field with the data from the JavaScript functions do the >>> following in an active link... >>> >>> Run Process Command Line: >>> javascript:window.F(XXXXXXXX).DoSet(env_hostname()); >>> >>> Be sure to change XXXXXXXX with the field ID of the field you want to >>> set. >>> >>> This did not work, function env_ip_var returns null. >>> >>> ____________________________________________ >>> Solution 2: >>> >>> A set fields actions in an active link: >>> $PROCESS$ CMD /C "set username" >>> >>> This worked only in user tool. However this functionality is required for >>> web. >>> >>> ___________________________________________ >>> >>> If you have any other ideas, please do share. >>> >>> Regards, >>> Veeral Oza >>> >>> >>> >> _attend WWRUG10 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"_ > > _attend WWRUG10 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"_ > > _attend WWRUG10 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"_ > ------------------------------ > Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail. > _attend WWRUG10 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"_ > _______________________________________________________________________________ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug10 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"
