Anonymous

My feedback

  1. 1 vote
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    under review  ·  1 comment  ·  Features and bugs for MrTickTock  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Anonymous shared this idea  · 
  2. 3 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    planned  ·  6 comments  ·  Features and bugs for MrTickTock  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Anonymous commented  · 

    Jacek,

    Here's a stab at answering your questions

    What you've described is absolutely ok. All sensible approaches, and absolutely meets our needs.

    To your question of how to expose sub types, I think it would be sufficient to simply expose by adding a descriptive sub type text beside days marked as non working in any detail reports that are generated (detail meaning reports that list up each specific day) If you have reports that count stats, I don't think it's necessary to do "sub-stats". So if a report said 12 Non-working days total, absolutely acceptable that user would have to run a more detailed report to find out what those non-working days actually consisted of.

    Summary looks good, but last point you've got absolutely wrong: I should be thanking you. :)
    cheers,
    Paul

    Anonymous commented  · 

    Hi Jacek,

    understand your concerns completely. I think the existing setup isn't that far off actually. Especially since you pointed out that marking more days than allowed on vacation gives a warning - not prevents using it. This makes a big difference !! (you've clearly thought this through :)

    So with this new insight, I will ask my employees to mark all days off as vacation, issuing a special instruction that they need to understand that days off over and above limit should a) be approved in advance and b) their salary will be reduced.

    So:
    'Sick' is fine as is.
    'Working' - just sets back to working if you've made a mistake, so that's fine.
    'Vacation' = employee taking the day off & with my new insights I can make due with this...

    That leaves 'Non-working' which could still be a few other things:
    - Public holiday,
    - Paid leave (as opposed to vacation days, where I'll dock pay)
    - Courses maybe
    - Idle time (consultant who might not have a customer project to book against.
    - etc.

    But all of the above could also be covered by me setting up special Project/Accounts (though a bit messy). So there is a possible workaround for me here as well. Weakness here would be that users may still use Non-working in some way I don't understand or agree with.

    So in a final summary, based on your comments + a re-think I might suggest just 2 simple enhancements as a compromise:

    1) Add a single new category "Public Holiday"
    2) Keep Non-working, but when choosing this give user option to choose a sub-type of non-working: Company event, Training, Paid Leave, Unpaid Leave, Other (specify).
    If the first values in picklist were sysadmin configurable that would be great. If this is difficult, maybe don't even have a picklist but prompt the user to at least describe what this Non-working is all about....

    What do you think? Still too complex? If so, I fully understand.
    Look forward to your feedback & keep up good work with great product.

    cheers,
    Paul

    Anonymous shared this idea  · 

Feedback and Knowledge Base