Please share with the community what you think needs improvement with HEAT Service Management.
What are its weaknesses? What would you like to see changed in a future version?
There's a lack of integration with other products. This needs to be improved. Technical support needs improvement as well. There's a lack of technicians and resale engineers in our country. The user interface is good, but it could still use a bit of improvement.
My role is self-service. Sometimes I can't get the reports that I want until I go to the manager. His role allows for more reporting options, whereas mine is rather limited. Sometimes I feel even they need to put more into the new report. The standard reports are great, but they do not communicate as much. Another thing is to have more ownership, in terms of centralizing my support internally within my team. This solution is also used by our other departments, so it is set up in a way that even other IT officers can access. However, we don't do the same thing with it. We give support to the department. I give support to my sites, which are outside my vicinity. Things are mostly set by the consultants themselves, but as an institution, we might have our own thresholds, in terms of how we scale up, score, or rate the level of seriousness of an issue. For example, what I term as a high-level query would be when the site server is down. I have to do that within 24 hours. We asked the consultant to put that into the system, but there's nothing that has happened so far. In terms of the severity of the problem, we were still stuck. We need to know how to handle those thresholds. I think our problem lies with training or perhaps capacity. The minute we get proper, simplified documentation, because the manual that we were given is not as user-friendly as possible. We can get our messages via Outlook. I would like to be able to add alerts. For example, when you've been assigned to a particular query it should follow it up with what time the ticket will breach. They need to be looked into this, because sometimes it's just too short, especially when you need to escalate. Another thing is when you have to wait, maybe you should ask for more info. You may have to stop the service for some time until you gather all the information and work on it. I think those are some of the things that we need to address. We have a whole lot of issues.
Because it is so new, the really valuable processes like Release, Availability, and Financial Management are just bare bones. Configuration requirements are extensive, even in basic Service Desk processes. The categorization schema is not linked to the CMDB data model. This requires you to categorize twice, a pre-ITIL help desk approach that allows Service Desk agents to defeat the real value of linking processes via the CI involved.