UCCX 7.0 Supervisor's Change Access to CSQ

Unanswered Question
Jul 29th, 2010
User Badges:

Greetings,


We've recently upgraded to UCCX 7.0.1SR5 and one of the features that was of interest to us was the Supervisor's ability to change the skill levels of the agents in their team.  However, when logging into /appadmin as a supervisor, an unfortunate byproduct is the supervisor's ability to change the CSQ names and Resource Pool Selection Model.  Having change rights to either of these fields would obviously negatively impact any script that references them.  In my opinion, a supervisor shouldn't have these rights.  Attached is a screen shot of /appadmin when logged in as a supervisor.


I've opened a TAC case and so far, they are telling me that this is working as designed.  I just don't buy it as this is an administrator's function in my opinion.  Has anyone found any solution to this?


Thanks,


Jeff

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Overall Rating: 0 (0 ratings)
Loading.
Gabriel Saavedra Thu, 07/29/2010 - 15:26
User Badges:
  • Silver, 250 points or more

Hi Jeff,


Yes that is working as designed. Maybe you could try to make a direct connection to the database and update from there, of course you will need to know the schema of the database very well and how the tables are related with each other, I don't know if someone else tried this before or if that is recommended.


Gabriel

spjeffgricus Fri, 07/30/2010 - 08:41
User Badges:

I don't mean to argue, but this is a terrible design if this is the case.  Why would anyone give the supervisor the rights

to change the name of a CSQ which is hard coded into a script?  This is an administrator's function, not a supervisor's.  If a supervisor changes the name of a CSQ, the script will error out and calls will not complete.  That can't be working as designed.  Instructing supervisors "don't change the name of the CSQ or routing method" is not an option.


Thank you,


Jeff

Aaron Harrison Fri, 07/30/2010 - 10:13
User Badges:
  • Super Bronze, 10000 points or more
  • Community Spotlight Award,

    Member's Choice, May 2015

Hi Jeff


I'd agree that it's probably 'by design', but in my opinion it's not a good design. Unfortunately we're not positioned to fix it here...


I would first open a TAC case to clarify that it is actually working as designed; and if so your only real option is to submit an enhancement request.


Regards


Aaron


Please rate helpful posts...

Actions

This Discussion