SLAs, priorities and calls breaching
This is more me thinking out loud, but I guess it is also a feature change request...
We have a number of different clients who have different SLAs. Essentially, we offer say:
Priority 1 "critical":
Service outage that affects more than one user (or a VIP) where there is no workaround. e.g. Server failure, network outage.
Maximum Response time: 30 mins by phone or remote support, 2 hrs plus travel onsite.
Progress interval: Every 2 hours
Priority 3 "Medium":
Incidents that do not significantly impair the functionality of a system or do not significantly affect the service to users.
Maximum response time: Within 2 business days
Progress interval: 2 days
...and this can be different between different clients.
So what I'd really like to happen is to have multiple SLAs - which we can handle - but then have different escalations based on the priority - which I don't think is possible at the moment - or am I wrong?
Seeing as the whole area of SLAs and escalation is going to be reviewed (see forums.adventnet.com/viewtopic.php?t=11507), would it be possible to implement different escalations based on priorities and not only SLAs?
There's also the whole issue of a call breaching its SLA (which works now) without giving prior warning. What you really need to happen is the system generate alerts and reminders BEFORE a call breaches, otherwise you are going to have loads of SLA violations when a simple reminder would prevent most of these.
We get quite a few calls whihc cannot be answered quickly but can run over a few days. What you really need to be able to do is say "I need to get back to the client on Monday", and then if the support rep doesn't, the system should generate a "you need to do this" message. In this case, the client has been replied to once (and therefore met the current SLA criteria), but not kept informed about what is going on when the support rep said they would.
Does anyone else think this would be a good idea??
John
We have a number of different clients who have different SLAs. Essentially, we offer say:
Priority 1 "critical":
Service outage that affects more than one user (or a VIP) where there is no workaround. e.g. Server failure, network outage.
Maximum Response time: 30 mins by phone or remote support, 2 hrs plus travel onsite.
Progress interval: Every 2 hours
Priority 3 "Medium":
Incidents that do not significantly impair the functionality of a system or do not significantly affect the service to users.
Maximum response time: Within 2 business days
Progress interval: 2 days
...and this can be different between different clients.
So what I'd really like to happen is to have multiple SLAs - which we can handle - but then have different escalations based on the priority - which I don't think is possible at the moment - or am I wrong?
Seeing as the whole area of SLAs and escalation is going to be reviewed (see forums.adventnet.com/viewtopic.php?t=11507), would it be possible to implement different escalations based on priorities and not only SLAs?
There's also the whole issue of a call breaching its SLA (which works now) without giving prior warning. What you really need to happen is the system generate alerts and reminders BEFORE a call breaches, otherwise you are going to have loads of SLA violations when a simple reminder would prevent most of these.
We get quite a few calls whihc cannot be answered quickly but can run over a few days. What you really need to be able to do is say "I need to get back to the client on Monday", and then if the support rep doesn't, the system should generate a "you need to do this" message. In this case, the client has been replied to once (and therefore met the current SLA criteria), but not kept informed about what is going on when the support rep said they would.
Does anyone else think this would be a good idea??
John