I'm a BA working on contract at a local council.
The council is about to upgrade to 3.10 and at this time are taking a re-think about how the customer services RFS entry process is managed.
The product was probably not implemented that well originally and as time has gone on RFS codes have been added willy-nilly to satisfy short term needs and there's a feeling the RFS system has become over-engineered and used in a way other than it should.
For example: In classifying an RFS they are now using a paper copy 'Bible' of RFS codes (e.g. 'ADD - One additional recycling bin purchased'; ADD2 - Two additional recycling bins purchased etc - there's hundreds of them!) and placing these in the 'References' table/ field as they enter RFSs. This field is not designed to hold this type of data, the CSRs have to wade through pages and pages of codes and possibly choose the wrong one and the reporting is screwed.
So - they're looking at a serious overhaul of how they classify/ enter RFSs up front in the 3 tier 'decision tree' panel as summarised above.
This will involve pretty much scrapping the naming conventions they have now in favour of a better set which will also negate the need to place codes in the 'References' field.
My question is this - how feasible is this to do? I have no knowledge (yet) of the underlying table structure but I do have a support analyst to assist and a very gung-ho customer who wants all this done tomorrow.
Any opinions or further questions welcomed.