<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
</head>
<body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; ">
Thanks Anthony,
<div><br>
</div>
<div>A year or so ago we were piloting a tool that allowed CSEs to capture nuggets of information about the individual that was working the case. This information would then be visible in every other case that individual opened or got involved in. When designing
the tool we talked about ratings and it was quite intensely debated, for the reasons you cited and others. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>There have been some backend tools changes that pretty much killed that project but it's nice to hear that someone thinks we were on the right track.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>
<div>-Ryan </div>
<br>
<div>
<div>On Aug 14, 2013, at 5:52 PM, Anthony Holloway <<a href="mailto:avholloway+cisco-voip@gmail.com">avholloway+cisco-voip@gmail.com</a>> wrote:</div>
<br class="Apple-interchange-newline">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>Ryan,<br>
<br>
</div>
Since you wanted to hear from non-Cisco folks, I'll chime in. :)<br>
<br>
</div>
It would be great if instead of making an assumption, in either direction (CCIE = More Competent or No-CCIE = Less Competent), that case openers can have ratings and reviews associated to them. I.e., If I open a case and am prepared with good information,
screenshots, logs, and a clear problem statement, that should hold some weight over whether or not I have a CCIE. Think about an Amazon product review, and how star ratings/comments help consumers understand what it is they are buying. Is it a piece of junk,
a good value, or the best of the best?<br>
<br>
</div>
I understand that the devil's advocate in all of us would say: Well that rating system can be abused to artificially inflate a friend's rating, or to damage the image of a person you dislike over that one bad case you had with them. However, I think these
risks can be mitigated with the proper checks and balances to the point of making the system useful. You could start with attaching Cisco ID's to the reviews/ratings to remove the anonymity that most internet reviews provide.<br>
<br>
</div>
<div>Anyway, this is just something I have been kicking around in my head for a few years. I always like to pretend that there's already a rating system in place, and since I always treat my assigned TAC person with respect, I'd like to think my fictitious
rating is 5 stars! Besides, you never know when karma may strike in your favor. ;)<br>
<br>
</div>
<div>And since we're on the topic of TAC: Thank you and the other TAC/HTTS folks who participate on this mailing list, helping all of us out with our many issues.<br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 10:07 AM, Ryan Ratliff (rratliff)
<span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:rratliff@cisco.com" target="_blank">rratliff@cisco.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div style="word-wrap:break-word">Basic troubleshooting makes me wonder what is different about you from the rest of your team?
<div>Here's the answer.</div>
<div><a href="http://www.cisco.com/web/learning/certifications/expert/program/index.html" target="_blank">http://www.cisco.com/web/learning/certifications/expert/program/index.html</a>
<div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<h3>Technical Service Requests (Case Routing)</h3>
<p>Service requests made to Cisco Technical Support (TS) by CCIEs in good standing, on behalf of an organization with a valid support contract, will be routed directly to the more experienced core TS support engineers. Routing is done automatically based on
Cisco User ID; no special phone number or URL is required. For more information, contact
<a href="http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/687/Directory/DirTAC.shtml" target="_blank">
Cisco Technical Support</a>.</p>
</blockquote>
</div>
<div><br>
<div>I'd love to hear the other (non Cisco) folks chime in on whether this applies to cases the CCIE works directly or opens and then hands off to a (non-CCIE) colleague.</div>
<div><br>
<div>-Ryan </div>
<br>
<div>
<div>
<div class="h5">
<div>On Aug 14, 2013, at 10:34 AM, Erick Wellnitz <<a href="mailto:ewellnitzvoip@gmail.com" target="_blank">ewellnitzvoip@gmail.com</a>> wrote:</div>
<br>
<div dir="ltr">
<div>Wondering if any of the Cisco guys could shed some light on a situation?</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Guys on my team, non CCIE, non Partner, are getting thrid party 'engineers' when they open TAC cases and very poor service. Is this the norm now? When I open a case I get a 15 - 20 minute response time even on sev. 4 cases.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>It's kind of goofy that in order to get a deccent TAC engineer I would have to open all of the cases and hand them off.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Thanks!</div>
<div> </div>
<div>-E</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
_______________________________________________<br>
cisco-voip mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net" target="_blank">cisco-voip@puck.nether.net</a><br>
<a href="https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip" target="_blank">https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip</a><br>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
cisco-voip mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net">cisco-voip@puck.nether.net</a><br>
<a href="https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip" target="_blank">https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip</a><br>
<br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</body>
</html>