Alexander Heinze Microsoft SR TECHNICAL SPECIALIST

Already today we are able to deploy the FS App using MDM tools such as Microsoft Intune. Especially in the light of GDPR, it would be beneficial to also have advanced MAM features available, such as policies to prevent users from copying content from the FS App and pasting it into a personal mail client. Suggestion: Embed Intune SDK into the FS App.

The current working hour management does not provide enough flexibility. Requirements such as bi-weekly schedules can only be achieved through the API at the moment. Suggestion: Improve work hour administration. Ask to the community: Please add comments with your specific requirements. In addition to that, all bigger companies request shift/roster management instead of managing individual resource's working hours. It would be very helpful to be able to define shifts on a calendar and then associate resources to shifts.

We already have the ability to constrain potential booking candidates by criteria such as territory and skills. Suggestion: Add validity dates/times to resource skills, resource roles/categories, resource territories etc. and consider them in Schedule Assistant and RSO. This way we would support scenarios such as for example: - resources that can be flexibly assigned to territories - resources have one role in the morning and another in the afternoon or different roles per day - skills such as certifications could automatically be activated or expire

Most dispatchers use multiple monitors. It would be beneficial if the different panels (in particular the list of RRs, the map, the Gantt chart) could be detached and placed on different monitors to make perfect use of the available real estate.

Similar to RSO, I would like to be able to ignore working hours when running Schedule Assistant or the API. Use case: My resources work 8:00am to 6:00pm, but I have an emergency WO at 8:00pm. I want to see my resources with travel duration to either book them or be able to call them and check whether they can help.

As of today, time window start and end are capture and displayed as date/time fields, which is often confusing for the user. Suggestion: Similar to date-only fields, also provide time-only fields. Workaround could be the ability to only show the time portion of a date/time field in standard views.

Many customers face the situation that their customer call and ask about a scheduled service visit (i.e. a booking). Currently they need to open a separate browser tab, navigate to bookings and try to find the booking based on a combination of different fields. Suggestion: Provide an integrated search facility that allows a dispatcher/agent to locate bookings from within the schedule board.

In some industries we see that a significant part of the work order duration is setup time. Imagine a job type where 1 hour work order duration includes 30 minutes prep time. If we would be able to combine 2 of these work orders, the technician would only be booked for 1.5 hours instead of 2 hours with separate work orders, leading to significantly more efficiency. But to make things more complex, if for some reason the first job took longer than expected, then the 2nd job would need to be separated again and scheduled with the original timing. Suggestion: Provide parameters that define when work orders can be combined, ideally even in RSO.

Today we have resource images for contacts and users, on the map pin and truck icons. Suggestion: Provide resource images for all resource types. Consider the new image field type instead of the entity image if that adds value. Instead of map and truck pin, provide more flexibility on icon and color usage. There have also been cases where people preferred to display icon and color based on booking status or work order type. Allow configuration of hover tool tip.

OOTB the work order skills are populated based on the incident type. However multiple customers have explained situations where they would like to specify required skills also on the account (e.g. entry certificate), customer asset (e.g. for highly-customized assets) or product (instead of building a huge matrix of job type and product type just have a generic incident template that is complemented by product-specific skill requirements). A similar approach would be nice for Work Order Service Tasks, however it will then be hard to report on planned duration vs. actual duration, e.g. there might be site-related tasks or tasks that only apply to a certain asset.