[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Prev in Thread] [Next in Thread] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

RE: Support Group Structure Recommendations



So in theory we could set it up that the local IT support at their specific offices could be members of their local groups and have a group setup above them all as the Parent and add the non-local people to so they would receive access to the tickets but not be bombarded with the notifications?


So something like this:

                Sub Parent Central Region Group

                                Local Group A

                                Local Group B

                                Local Group C


Then we added people, let’s say Jim, Barb, & John, in the following setup:

                SPCRG: Jim, Barb, John

                                LGA: Jim

                                LGB: Barb

                                LGC: John


Then they would all have access to each other’s queues but they would only receive notifications for the respective locations?


Did I understand that correctly?


Levi Lippincott / Associate Remedy Developer


+1 402 561 7014 office

+1 402 321 5421 mobile



Interpublic Group  6825 Pine Street, Omaha, NE 68106


"Talent is a Gift; But Character is a Choice." -Matt Grotewold-


From: ARSList [mailto:arslist-bounces@arslist.org] On Behalf Of Joel D Sender
Sent: Monday, June 4, 2018 1:16 PM
To: 'ARSList' <arslist@arslist.org>
Subject: RE: [EXTERNAL] Support Group Structure Recommendations



Hierarchical groups allow ‘parent’ groups to include other groups.

All the ‘Sub # - Company 2’ groups could be collected into a ‘parent’ group, across Tenant Companies.

For example, if each ‘company’ had a separate HR group, a master HR group could include them all.


That notices only going to regular (non-collector) groups is actually a feature; a member of a collector/parent group could be buried in notices.

This is especially true if you combine collector groups into larger collector groups; i.e. regional HR groups into a top-level company HR group.

If someone needs the notices, put them in that regular group.


Let us know how you decide to proceed.



Joel Sender  *   JDSender@earthlink.net 


From: ARSList [mailto:arslist-bounces@arslist.org] On Behalf Of Lippincott, Levi (OMA-GIS)
Sent: Monday, June 4, 2018 9:56 AM
To: 'arslist@arslist.org'
Subject: Support Group Structure Recommendations


Hello ARSList!


I work for a company that has several companies it owns which in turn own many companies themselves which translates to several hundred companies around the globe.


Think of the company structure as:

                Main Company

                                Sub Company 1

                                                Sub-1 Company 1

                                                Sub-1 Company 2

                                                Sub-1 Company 3

                                                Sub-1 Company 4

                                                Sub-1 Company 5

                                Sub Company 2

                                                Sub-2 Company 1

                                                Sub-2 Company 2

                                                Sub-2 Company 3


Our local IT support often handles support for multiple companies, typically under the same sub parent company though sometimes they can handle multiple sub parent companies at the 1 or several sites throughout a city. So for years we have operated under a model where our local support group policy has been 1 group per city per company.


This has served us well up until more recently. Now we have several local IT support teams that are providing support for larger sub parent companies and they are now supporting multiple cities which has led them to be a member of 50+ support groups. This is creating a performance issues when loading & refreshing their Incident Management Console.


Our other challenge is we have one helpdesk that relies heavily on the custom assignment rules to be able to send tickets to the correct location’s local support when they need to escalate an incident to a field tech.


So we have been considering different methods to structure these groups in a way that we can minimize the number of groups they belong to, to increase performance, but we keep running into the challenge of those assignment rules becoming complex and hard to manage.


We just upgraded, a couple weeks ago, from 8.1.00 to 9.1.04 and I’ve just become aware of the Parent Groups and it seems that might be a good approach but I don’t know how well it will work in practical application especially with the note I saw in the documentation: “Hierarchical group relationships are used for permissions management only, and are not recognized when sending notifications by group.”


Does anyone have any recommended methods of handling this type of a structure? Does anyone have any use cases they’ve encountered throughout their careers that we might be able to apply to our scenario?



This message contains information which may be confidential and privileged. Unless you are the intended recipient (or authorized to receive this message for the intended recipient), you may not use, copy, disseminate or disclose to anyone the message or any information contained in the message.  If you have received the message in error, please advise the sender by reply e-mail, and delete the message.  Thank you very much.


Virus-free. www.avast.com