Several things stopped us using it -
Licenses - The expectation of a chat session is that someone will always be available and licenses can not be spared to faciliatate this
User Availability - We wouldn't be able to take someones focus away from normal duties to monitor chat
Management - Who would manage the design, structure, users, etc.
Theres also the business rules which would now need to be checked and updated.
When it was weighed up the value or 'want' just wasn't their.
These two modules are still too basic for us to use it. We already have an enterprise wide chat client and social board that is much more robust for it to compete with.
Hey Chris, Did you end up using Social Board and Chat within HEAT? If you did, was there any lessons learnt and how did you get buy-in from staff to actually use HEAT Social Board and Chat, especially when there are other enterprise wide solutions eg Skype for Business etc? I am looking at introducing this functionality to our Service Desk staff. Thanks.
- Social Board would be good if there was more filtering options - right now it's only based on user teams but as it can potentially be for self service, further filters may be required i.e. based on user's department/org unit or based on role, etc, then expose this content
- Chat - still too basic. Majority of the use cases I hear from users when they query about chat is the ability for self service users to chat to someone at the service desk but for this to happen, there needs to be queuing and availability statuses set up so that the user doesn't just wait for a response. From what I can see as well, it's only person to person.
Right now both functions are quite internal based and a majority of the customers I have spoken with are looking for this type of functionality but more catering not just internal collaboration but also to self service users as well.
Concurrent licenses stopped us using this feature because someone needs to be logged on all the time to answer questions tieing up a license that otherwise could be used by other people.
Although all likelihood is there that the Service Desk will be logged in there is no guarentee and we use the system across 40 different business functions - 65 concurrent licenses could be serving 195 users logged in at any point so rather than pay £1k+ for named licenses it's better to use other methods.
A better idea would be to seperate the chat and social board features from licensing completely allowing groups to deal with user questions without the need to log in.
We have not. As most have been saying it is a bit too basic.
Chris, great point about the licenses, I hadn't considered that aspect. I dont think it will make too much of a difference for us, but it is worth a look to be certain.
Thanks for the feedback. It sounds like people have considered using it, and would like to use it, but there initial limitations that get in the way of any serious consideration.