Mobile worklfow developers need your input!

[Hilsbos, Margaret A]

I agree with Manish on item 1.  My first reaction to the question was "give the user the option". I think the default should be updated list. Provide a user setting for manual refresh, and something in the help that if the screen takes too long to come up, they can try the manual refresh option.

On #2, I agree that most of the time 'comments optional' is fine, and that seems to be overwhelmingly the preferred position. But could it be configurable in the workflow definition? I've had users request in some cases that a comment be required for rejection. (Of course the response is that we can force the user to enter something, but we can't force them to enter a meaningful comment). In any case the comment dialog should always be presented to the user so that they have to make a decision that they don't want to leave a comment.

Thanks for asking!

Margaret Hilsbos
Corporate IT, Day & Zimmermann<http://www.dayzim.com/>
(215) 299-5630

This e-mail message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and/or privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.




From: sap-wug-bounces at mit.edu [mailto:sap-wug-bounces at mit.edu] On Behalf Of Manish Khanna
Sent: Monday, April 18, 2011 2:13 AM
To: SAP Workflow Users' Group
Subject: RE: Mobile worklfow developers need your input!

Hi Ginger,

Item 1 - Inbox Listing: I will say it depends on the state of application.

1)     On application launch any user would expect an up-to-date list. So a launch taking 2-4 sec to display would seem normal to the user.

2)     On changing focus, the expectations could be mixed.

a.      For some 2-4 sec delay could be annoying; some people do expect fast response time. There might be others who usually have less workload or may be less frequent. For them 30min to 1 hour may not be a justified time period for a forced refresh. So they might be ok with an indicator denoting that the list is not up-to-date. Maybe the 'Refresh' button could be highlighted or flashed (blinked). This would make onus to refresh lie with the user.

b.      Going a step further on the flexibility, if feasible, an application setting could provide the control to the user - they may choose between forced or a manual refresh option.


Item 2  - Optional comments for rejection seems to be fine.

Thanks
Manish

From: sap-wug-bounces at mit.edu [mailto:sap-wug-bounces at mit.edu] On Behalf Of Gatling, Ginger
Sent: Saturday, April 16, 2011 2:56 AM
To: sap-wug at mit.edu
Subject: Mobile worklfow developers need your input!

Hello, The mobile development group is looking at some additional ideas for workflow on mobile devices and they have the following questions for you:
Item 1:
If you have to choose only one, what would be more important for you in case of a mobile application for approvals when you launch the application or bring it back from background after half an hour:

A)     See the list of work items as fast as possible, so you can immediately try to start working even if some of the items might be out-of-date and there is some chance that you run into an error.

B)     See an up-to-date list of work items and wait a bit more (2-4 seconds) for it.


Item 2:
For user decisions in the inbox, like approvals, the question is around rejections.  The plan is to not require comments - but there will be an option to approve/reject.  After selecting reject (for example) the user will be able to reject or add comments (or cancel).  The question is: Is it OK to not force comments on reject, but to make it optional only?

So - please let us know what you think!
Thanks!
Ginger ( you can also reach me direct at ginger.gatling at sap.com<mailto:ginger.gatling at sap.com>)




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/sap-wug/attachments/20110418/b14b8d2e/attachment.htm