SLA paused on due Date not passed for ticket without due date

[Florent Michelis]

Hi,

We have a doubt on how the paused SLA on due date is working.

We tried to follow this document:

https://confluence.atlassian.com/servicedeskserver/example-creating-an-sla-based-on-due-date-956713305.html.

We want to pause de SLA for the tickets that have a due date, to not impact the SLA results negatively for tickets that do not need to be resolved before a specific date.

We're setting the "pause on" option to "due date: not passed"

This is working correctly for tickets that actually have due date. The timer start to count down once the due date is reached.

But we are not sure how this should work for ticket that do not have due date.

We were expecting that the tickets that do not have due date to not be affected by the pause option.

But what really happens is that the tickets without due date are put on paused indefinitely, because it seems they never reach the due date.

Is it the way it intends to work?

What is the solution if we don't want the ticket without due date being affected by the pause option?

Thanks in advance for your answer!

[Jack Brickey]

@Florent Michelis, this is an interesting SLA for sure. Here is something to try. I haven't tested but I think it may work. LMK...

Create two different SLAs: TTR-NoDue and TTR-Due. Define your goals for each using the appropriate JQL, e.g.

TTR-NoDue: duedate is EMPTY and priority = Highest...

TTR-Due: duedate is not EMPTY and priority = Highest...

you will want to test what happens if the Due Date is added/removed after creation. Does it switch SLAs?

[Florent Michelis]

Hi Jack,

Thank's a lot for your answer!

I tried it, and yes it works. It switches SLAs.

But it is not what I want. For reporting purposes, I don't want to create a new SLA.

It has to be the same SLA.

Besides, I still wonder why the issue without due date are put on pause. Is it the correct behaviour or I am doing somenting wrong?

[Jack Brickey]

@Florent Michelis, I’m sure that “empty” due date is assessed as ‘true’ in the “due date: not passed” statement. I would need to play with the use case and see if I can figure out a way to make it work. I will try to do that this week.

[Florent Michelis]

Thank you Jack.

Much appreciated!

[Roman Braunstingl]

Hi, 

I just stumbled across this post as one of our customers has pretty much the exact same problem - this seems to be a Bug with Jira Service Desk.

Did you find any resolution that does not include another SLA? This is very unfortunate for reporting purposes.

Best regards,

Roman

[Florent Michelis]

Hi Roman,

I'm very happy to see that we're not the only one to face this problem.

I decided, more than a month ago, to raise a ticket to Atlassian.

After lot of back and forth, the conclusion was that the way it is working now is the expected result. Unfortunately, I had to let the ticket go because of my late busy timetable.

The workaround that was suggested, apart for creating another SLA, which is not possible in our case, was to assigned a compulsory due date to all the ticket.

This is not for us a "clean" solution, because this due date should be the day before the ticket's creation. Indeed, the ticket are unpaused the following day after the due date is reached.

I just commented the ticket again and ask if it could be considered as a bug.

I don't understand why the way it is implemented now could benefit to the user. Maybe there is something I don't see.

Cheers

Florent

[Roman Braunstingl]

Hi Florent,

thanks for the reply and the update.

We are already considering the mentioned work-around with the default due date.

I am on your page here - for me this also seems like a Bug, as this makes the feature unusable without further customisations which don't make sense, but if there already is a ticket, I assume we can't really do more than that.

Thanks & best regards,

Roman