Search
Topics
  Create an account Home  ·  Topics  ·  Downloads  ·  Your Account  ·  Submit News  ·  Top 10  
Modules
· Home
· Content
· FAQ
· Feedback
· Forums
· Search
· Statistics
· Surveys
· Top
· Topics
· Web Links
· Your_Account

Current Membership

Latest: JannStrehl
New Today: 37
New Yesterday: 79
Overall: 149817

People Online:
Visitors: 82
Members: 1
Total: 83 .

Languages
Select Interface Language:


Major ITIL Portals
For general information and resources, ITIL and ITSM World is the most well known for both ITIL and ITIL Books. A shorter snapshot approach can be found at ITIL Zone

Related Resources
Service related resources
Service Level Agreement
Outsourcing

Note: ® ITIL is a registered trademark of OGC. This portal is totally independent and is in no way related to them. See our Feedback Page for more information.


The Itil Community Forum: Forums

ITIL :: View topic - Terminology - common expression
 Forum FAQForum FAQ   SearchSearch   UsergroupsUsergroups   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Terminology - common expression
Goto page Previous  1, 2
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    ITIL Forum Index -> The ITIL Service Desk
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Diarmid
Senior Itiler


Joined: Mar 04, 2008
Posts: 1884
Location: Newcastle-under-Lyme

PostPosted: Tue Mar 09, 2010 7:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

MiraH,

thank you for clarifying. I agree that "issue" is problematic.

"ticket" or "call" "message" or "communication" are four options that spring to mind. I'm sure there are other possibilities.

They all have their drawbacks:

ticket - may sound too "techie" to users
call - pedantic users will complain that "my email was not a call"
message - may sound too informal
communication - is rather a long word

Different types of users will have different attitudes to these.

Two key points:

1. select a word that fits easily into your culture so that both your staff and the users, as a whole (you can never please everybody), are comfortable with it.
2. make sure the first response provides the user with a reference code (number) unique to that call/ticket/etc. and use the reference in every communication you make.

In the end it shouldn't matter that much because, so long as you are strongly consistent about it, everyone will get used to whatever term you have chosen.
_________________
"Method goes far to prevent trouble in business: for it makes the task easy, hinders confusion, saves abundance of time, and instructs those that have business depending, both what to do and what to hope."
William Penn 1644-1718
Back to top
View user's profile Send e-mail
MiraH
Newbie
Newbie


Joined: Mar 04, 2010
Posts: 5
Location: Prague

PostPosted: Tue Mar 09, 2010 9:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks,
it helps.
Míra
Back to top
View user's profile
DYbeach
Senior Itiler


Joined: May 25, 2008
Posts: 413
Location: Sydney, Australia

PostPosted: Thu Mar 11, 2010 8:54 am    Post subject: Re: is the term "ticket" suitable ? Reply with quote

MiraH wrote:
Hi Diarmid, Timo, DYbeach,

Would sound the sentences below "natural" in (business) English?
" ... Dear client I am about to discuss with you the ticket ..."
" ... I have just changed the type of your ticket from "Service request" to "Request for Change" ..."
" ... I am sorry I have to decline your ticket as it was found unsubstantial ..."

------



Hi Mira
You need a comma after "dear client"
"I am about to discuss with you the ticket" is clumsy use of English. I suggest "regarding ticket #####"

" ... I have just changed the type of your ticket from "Service request" to "Request for Change" ..... I suggest you say "I have just recategorised ticket ##### from Service Request to Request For Change" and give the reason

My two cents' worth only. Hope it helps
_________________
DYbeach
ITIL V3 Release, Control & Validation,
ITIL V3 Operation SUpport & Analysis
PMI CAPM (R)

"In times of universal deceit, telling the truth will be a revolutionary act." George Orwell
Back to top
View user's profile Send e-mail
Diarmid
Senior Itiler


Joined: Mar 04, 2008
Posts: 1884
Location: Newcastle-under-Lyme

PostPosted: Thu Mar 11, 2010 8:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Top of the class DY.

Now for the final one - " ... I am sorry I have to decline your ticket as it was found unsubstantial ..."

for this I would not say ticket, but refer to the actual category of ticket involved (e.g. service request).

But I would go much further and take a softly softly approach (there should not be many occurrences after all). I would ask to discuss the <ticket> to clarify the requirement and if it is found wanting (I don't like substantial here) I would conclude with something like "As discussed, we are having to reject your service request (number ######) for <service> because ..."
_________________
"Method goes far to prevent trouble in business: for it makes the task easy, hinders confusion, saves abundance of time, and instructs those that have business depending, both what to do and what to hope."
William Penn 1644-1718
Back to top
View user's profile Send e-mail
DYbeach
Senior Itiler


Joined: May 25, 2008
Posts: 413
Location: Sydney, Australia

PostPosted: Thu Mar 11, 2010 8:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Diarmid wrote:
Top of the class DY.

"


See? Laughing

Who says Oztraylians can't talk proper?
_________________
DYbeach
ITIL V3 Release, Control & Validation,
ITIL V3 Operation SUpport & Analysis
PMI CAPM (R)

"In times of universal deceit, telling the truth will be a revolutionary act." George Orwell
Back to top
View user's profile Send e-mail
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    ITIL Forum Index -> The ITIL Service Desk All times are GMT + 10 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2
Page 2 of 2

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

Powered by phpBB 2.0.8 © 2001 phpBB Group
phpBB port v2.1 based on Tom Nitzschner's phpbb2.0.6 upgraded to phpBB 2.0.4 standalone was developed and tested by:
ArtificialIntel, ChatServ, mikem,
sixonetonoffun and Paul Laudanski (aka Zhen-Xjell).

Version 2.1 by Nuke Cops © 2003 http://www.nukecops.com

Forums ©

 

Logos/trademarks property of respective owner. Comments property of poster. Rest © 2004 Itil Community for Service Management & Foundation Certification. SV
Site source copyright (c)2003, and is Free Software under the GNU / GPL licence. All Rights Are Reserved.