Field Service Management (FSM) & Planning and Scheduling Optimization (PSO)

I’m on FSM 6.28. I would like to create an input xml with a control type where I provide two options like Yes or No, but it doesn’t save as Y or N, but pre-defined values where Y = ‘value_1’ and N = ‘value_2’ or where I set to nothing, for example N = ‘ ‘. Or something like a checkbox control type but it doesn’t save it as Y or N. Also, am I able to display more than one control in one message?Below is an example of what I was trying to achieve and would like to know if that is possible.    <update_request>        <request>            <request_id xpath_node="//request_hierarchy_select_result[@result_name='detail']/request/request_id" />            <action_status>@user_input[id=convert_credit_prompt, table_name=request, column_name=action_status, control_type=CheckBox, choices=Yes:CONVERT_CREDIT;No:, required=Y, height=30]</action_status>            <update/>        </request>    </update_request>

Is anyone experiencing permission issues in 26r1SU3 that are not really permission issues?

Can someone show me where/how to define activities for MSO? 

can i create assistant page without using IFS developer studio?

Hi IFS Community,In IFS Cloud (we're on 24R2 currently) you have the Dispatch Console where you start with an Activity view. This shows the timeline and the allocated activities in time, it's very handy :)You do have the option to switch to the Utilization View manually, this shows the % of available time allocated with Activies, see yellow marked in 1st image.If you zoom out, at a certain point you are forced to switch to the Utilization view, here's the catch. Also the option to switch back to Activity view isn't there anymore (see yellow in 2nd image).We don't want that, we want to keep the Activity view. Is this possible? What is the rule/logic behind the switching? Is there a value, a setting?Activity view: Utilization view: Cheers,Stephan

Hi IFS Community,with the 25R1 release, the Selection Rules functionality was extended (e.g. rule types and weighting), which is a very welcome improvement. However, the current solution leaves some gaps and we are unclear if these are supposed to be filled in future releases.Our Use Case We use Selection Rules to distribute Service Requests into the correct delivery units. For our setup, Region and Model criteria are essential. The Service criteria, however, is largely irrelevant, as the organizational structure is the same for most services.Current LimitationAt the moment, the Service criteria is mandatory, which forces us to duplicate the entire Selection Rule set for each service (≈ 50 services) leading to a huge data volume in the table and the maintenance effort coming with it.Observation in the UI / Page DesignerIn both the UI and the Page Designer, it appears that:Criteria might be configurable as mandatory vs. optional Criteria might support individual weightingThese settings

Hi Experts,Please explain why it is not possible to connect a parent to a Structure? For example we have Head strcuture (AWS) and there are different Regional Teams we have setup as Structure too. Then there is no way we can assign AWS as a parent to regional team Structures?Why?  There we cannot select a Regional Team as a structure like EAST, WEST we cannot see in the list Please explain why its not possible, what is the business reason/Logic behind this function. ThanksKM

Hi All,I have a dataset that is used only for scheduling purposes, and ARP is not enabled for this dataset. The purpose is to automatically commit activities once the orders are created and sent to PSO.Currently, the scheduling parameter MAX COMMIT ACTIVITIES is configured with a value of 20. Based on my understanding, this allows up to 20 activities to be committed per resource per day.However, we have a requirement where we may receive up to 300 orders per day. I would like to clarify the following: If we increase the MAX COMMIT ACTIVITIES value from 20 to 300, will PSO automatically commit all 300 orders received in a day? If not, what other PSO/FSM configuration or parameters control the maximum number of activities that can be committed per day? What is the recommended configuration/approach to achieve automatic commitment of up to 300 orders per day, considering resource availability and scheduling capacity? Could you please advise on the correct configuration and recommended

A. What is your idea?1) ClassificationChoose ONE: keep the applicable option and delete the rest.Opportunity for improvement2) Brief descriptionWhat happened, what is missing, or what could be better? Focus on the problem or opportunity (not the solution).To propose a time window in which the activity needs to or can be be executed cant be introduced without using planned start and planned finish. It also does not provide the possability to limit the execution of activities in an exact time window (earliest start/ latest start / finish…. etc.).B. Context and scope1) Who is affected?Choose ONE or MORE: keep the applicable options and delete the rest.Internal users Customers Partners2) FrequencyChoose ONE: keep the applicable option and delete the rest.Frequently DailyC. Value and impact1) What is the business outcome?Choose ONE or MORE: keep the applicable options and delete the rest.Improves productivity or efficiency Enhances user experience Enables new capability2) Impact scaleChoose

If you have to do several tasks for one customer, it would be nice if you only had to ask for one signature from the customer at the end, so that all service reports are signed. For example, a signature on the last service report and this is transferred to all service requests that were generated for a customer on this day. Thanks Markus Kühnl

Hi all, we try to use Dispatch Console for manual scheduling of Request Tasks and Bundle Tasks. We are facing some usability issues and are looking forward to hear if someone has similar issues or found some solutions:  Ticket colour coding only works for regular tasks. Bundle Tasks are all shown in light green. Since we bundle tasks very frequently, this fails to meet our requirements. Zooming out eventually triggers the Utilization Mode. Instead of seeing tickets and days, the view changes to a solid area showing only the technician's planned-hours utilisation percentage. We work with tasks that spread across multiple days so Zoom levels are important for us, we don’t need to zoom in to 15min tasks or something like that. Utilisation view should be triggered with a button instead of a zoom level.  We have organised everything in Teams/Scheduling Units. As a result, you constantly have to switch between teams and reload the view whenever you want to see the schedule of a technician fr

We would like the ability to access the service object 360 screen directly from the location address page just like you can for the equipment navigator

Hello everyone,I followed the provided instructions to install the Hierarchical Travel Matrix (HTM) in PSO. However, when I attempted to test if it is working properly through the compare tab, I only received results from the straight-line distance.Here are the steps I took after the installation:Created a new HTM connection through the Connections form. Added "BAL" in the value field for the HierarchicalDatabaseMatrixId parameter. Entered "Hierarchical Travel Matrix" in the field of the TravelCalculationOption parameter. Chose the "Straight Line On Error" parameter (I have tested even without this parameter checked). Enabled the HTM connection.   HTM ConnectionPlease note that no errors were encountered during the entire process - not even in events.So, I would like to ask if the above procedure seems correct.Is there a way to verify if HTM has been configured correctly?Any insights or guidance would be greatly appreciated.Thank you!

Unfortunately IFS was not able to answer my question about their product and advised me to find an answer through the community.Hopefully someone had the same questions we do now in regards to using the Technician Portal or Mobile Work Order touch app.We are currently preparing for our migration to IFS Cloud 25R1, with the coming update to 26R1 and especially looking to the differences in creating new assignments on an assigned Work Task via the Technician Portal and the Mobile Work Order.With the workflow configuration action 'Restrict Follow-On Work Actions On Incompletion' not enabled, we don't see the options that the MWO would show, like 'Do not reassign to me' or 'Needs to be planned'.Via Technician Portal a new assignment is created, but connected to the current technician, set to status Accepted and planned at the time of creation with no option to replan.Via the Mobile Work Order, Arcwide tells us (and a quick read of the IFS documentation https://docs.ifs.com/ifsclouddocs/26r

Hi,  As mentioned in the title, I had tested the eform termination for a configured workflow where when you fill in the survey, the work should be incomplete.The filters were added for planning information: This setup worked as expected. The incomplete prompt came up after completing the survey.  Then I was testing with setting the Filters based on the object information: The action flow was added with termination eform similar to above: This did not prompt the incomplete after completing the eform.  Could this be a bug? I also tested the same with the WF that worked (11) by removing the planning information and adding object information as filters which confirmed the termination only applied for planning information.  Thank you! 

Hello experts,Please see screenshot below. The resource CHA is not getting more jobs committed today, because he has jobs downloaded in his device for next week, and the week after, so it seems that max committed jobs allocated in the rule, which is 5, is stopping more jobs getting allocated today. We have modified the rule parameters, please second screenshot, but the change in the Rule Window (1 day) has not worked to limit the rule to a validation of only the current day. Could you please advise? 

Hi Team,We have a requirement to enable Mass Fix of Resource for a single Resource. Customer want to disable “Apply to all Resources”  in the Mass Changes screen. Is it possible to control through any parameter. Please advise. Regards.RRP 

How does IFS calculate travel time and how is travel time shown in GANTT? 

I have a placed Barrier along the River Thames, this is journey times that under the HTM travel, wont cross the river. For the below example, it has added the additional travel between the start location and the first job, despite the actual route not crossing the barrierAny ideas how I can stop this happening?

Hi,We have fixed Time, Fixed resource tasks and then its assigned to the engineer. Next after few second its noted the job is uncomitted.These engineers do not use Mobile and there is no Commit rule or any at the moment. Why PSO uncommit these manually allocated jobs?Is there a way atleast we ca get a reason for this behavior? First CommittedThen PSO uncommit it again.   ThanksKM

Following 25R2 New Feature - Service Campaign - trying to try the process in IFS Cloud 25R2.Created the Service Campaign using Campaign Type “Repair RMA” to replicate a real life example where a repair is required for a newly built items under warranty   Added 2 lines (as in 2 objects   button “Create All RMA’s” Pop-up suggests a background job is posted to create the RMA’sAnd it says there’s an Error:  “Repair RMA for Service Campaign Line 1 for Service Campaign RJ001 was not successfully created.ORA-20124: Error.NULLVALUE: Field [RETURN_REASON] is mandatory for Depot Rma Line and requires a value.” Observation: There is nowhere in the lines or in the header of the Service Campaign where the Return Reason can be input. There is no pop-up that allows it when Create RMA is used.Question: How is Service Campaign supposed to be progressed?

it looks like IFS-Cloud does not provide a way to move many Serial/Service Objects at once to a new Belongs To Object (needs changing in bulk). For customers that refirm this is a lot of manual work. Every object/machine needs to be touched and clicked multiple times. what is the best way to do bulk changes?   Objects → Pen menu → Edit All does not work. 

Hi, I’m running into some difficulties when trying to enter a No Part Material Requisition Line on a Work Task in 25R2. I get an error when trying to save the Req Line which my Technical team have looked into and advised “In IFS Cloud Core code itself, the No Part Description has been set to exclude from the form if the header has a Work Order Number” .I’d like confirmation that a user should be able to raise a No Part Material Requisition Line on a Work Task that in turn will be connected to a No Part Purchase Requisition Line as standard and OOTB. I was surprised during testing that I couldn’t do this due to an error message and even more surprised at the technical investigation findings of this.High Level Steps I’m following:From Work Task screen create a new Material Req Line  Send Type = Supplier (Supply Code will auto change to Purchase Order) Enter Quantity - 1  Enter UOM -  * Select Save - (needs to be done as the No Part Description field is not visible on the screen but is vi

 !--startfragment>Issue Observed on work tasks:While assigning work, the Allocations / Direct Allocations section did not show the full list of resources. The “Apply Constraints” toggle was disabled to check if it affected visibility. Even after disabling it, resources from other resource groups were still not displayed.!--endfragment> Under Allocations Tab:In 24R1 Release: I was able to see all resources list under the allocations tab upon disabling the ‘Apply Constraints’ button. Whereas, in 25R1 version, even after disabling the toggle button, only the resources listed under the specific resource group/demand were displayed.Under the Direct Allocations tab:The resource list is empty. Not even a single resource id was displayed. So, currently, i cannot assign any specific resources to the work tasks and unable to transfer them to MWO.Has anyone else run into the same behavior or noticed similar missing resources?!--endfragment>!--startfragment>!--startfragment>Any guid

Hi Team, Iam using IFS cloud & PSOI have a query regarding the Slot Usage Rule configuration, specifically the difference between Maximum Utilization (%) and Maximum Slot Utilization (%).I tested both scenarios by setting the utilization to 10%, but in both cases I am getting the same output. I would like to understand how these two fields are expected to behave differently.Current ScenarioI have 4 FTs with the same skill, and each FT has 8 hours of availability:4 FTs × 8 hours = 32 FT-hours total availabilityWith a 10% utilization target:32 × 10% = 3.2 FT-hoursMy expectation is that the system should allow up to 3.2 FT-hours of booking utilization across the overall available capacity, irrespective of which slot the booking falls into.I have two slots:7:00 AM – 11:00 AM 11:00 AM – 3:00 PMCurrent BehaviorWhen the utilization reaches approximately 1.6 hours in the 7:00–11:00 AM slot, the system stops showing the first slot and only shows availability in the 11:00 AM–3:00 PM slot.Thi