• State Verified Answer
  • Replies 6 replies
  • Answers 1 answer
  • Subscribers 2 subscribers
  • Views 0 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
Related

Dispatcher view all technicians but only edit own team?

Anita Sharma

I am configuring FieldPulse for a multi-region operations structure and require clarification on the granularity of role-based access control.

Configuration details:

  1. We have 3 regional dispatch teams (North, Central, South)
  2. Each team has 2 dispatchers
  3. Dispatchers must coordinate scheduling across regions for resource sharing
  4. Dispatchers should not modify technician assignments outside their assigned region

I have reviewed the Admin, Manager, and Dispatcher role definitions in the documentation. The Manager role permits editing of all technicians, which exceeds our requirements. The Dispatcher role does not appear to support hierarchical scoping by team or region.

Please confirm whether the following configuration is achievable:

  • View permission: All technicians (read-only visibility across organization)
  • Edit permission: Technicians assigned to the dispatcher's specific team or region only

I have confirmed that the Team field is populated for all technician records. I am operating on FieldPulse version 3.2.1.

Is this achievable through native configuration, or does it require a custom role configuration that must be escalated to FieldPulse support?

  • 0
    Hi Anita, great question! This is a common scenario for multi-region teams.

    Happy to help clarify the current permission structure. At this time, the Dispatcher role does not support native team-scoped editing while maintaining organization-wide visibility. The permission model operates on these tiers:

    1. Dispatcher — can view and edit all technicians (same as Manager for technician management)
    2. Technician — limited to own assignments

    There is not a middle tier for "view all, edit subset." I have flagged this as a feature request in our internal tracking system.

    For your immediate needs, the two viable workarounds are:

    • Process-level: Dispatchers communicate cross-region schedule changes through a designated regional lead who has Manager rights
    • Custom role: FieldPulse Professional Services can configure a scoped role via backend configuration — this requires a brief scoping call

    Would you like me to connect you with Professional Services, or shall I provide documentation on the regional lead workflow pattern that other customers use?

  • 0

    From a governance perspective, it is worth noting that the "view all, edit subset" permission model introduces audit complexity that FieldPulse's current role architecture does not natively support.

    In my implementation, we addressed this through a structural rather than permissions-based approach:

    1. We created distinct FieldPulse accounts for each region (North, Central, South)
    2. Established a master scheduling view through the API, aggregating data for coordination purposes
    3. Regional dispatchers maintain edit rights within their account scope

    This configuration provides clean audit boundaries and satisfies our compliance requirements for data segregation. It is worth noting that this approach requires API development effort and is not suitable for all organizations.

    It is also worth noting that the Professional Services custom role mentioned above may not provide the audit logging granularity required for certain regulatory frameworks. I recommend requesting a detailed permissions matrix before proceeding with that option.

  • 0

    Another way to think about it: we implemented a hybrid approach that might bridge the gap without custom development.

    We use the Team field as a soft filter rather than a hard permission boundary. Our dispatch board has saved filters per region, and we reinforced through training that dispatchers should only modify their own team's assignments. The Audit Log (available under Admin > Account Activity) provides the oversight layer — we run weekly reports on dispatcher modifications and address exceptions through process review rather than technical restriction.

    This is not as clean as native permissions would be, but it operationalizes within 48 hours versus waiting for a custom build. For a team your size, the weekly audit review adds perhaps 15 minutes of administrative overhead.

    From an operational risk standpoint, we have found that the combination of clear SOPs plus audit visibility provides sufficient control. The number of actual cross-regional edit incidents has been minimal once the workflow was established.

  • 0 in reply to Nadia Petrov

    Thank you, Nadia. I appreciate the operational context.

    I have confirmed that our compliance framework requires technical enforcement rather than procedural controls for this access pattern. The audit-log-only approach does not satisfy our internal controls documentation.

    I will escalate to Professional Services for the custom role configuration. Priya, please provide the contact details for initiating that engagement.

  • 0

    In my experience working with multi-region dispatch configurations, the Professional Services scoped role is the path that aligns with your compliance requirements. What I typically recommend is preparing the following documentation before your scoping call:

    1. A matrix of roles (Dispatcher North, Dispatcher Central, Dispatcher South) mapped to Team values
    2. Specific actions that must be permitted versus prohibited (e.g., can they view but not reassign? view schedule only?)
    3. Your audit retention requirements

    The custom role configuration uses a backend permissions framework that is not exposed in the standard UI. In my experience, the implementation timeline is 5-7 business days following the scoping call, assuming the permission matrix is straightforward.

    It is worth noting that this configuration will place your organization on a non-standard permissions path, which means future feature releases may require additional validation. I typically recommend that customers on custom roles maintain a test environment or schedule a validation window following each quarterly release.

    I will note that the cost for this configuration is typically absorbed into an existing Professional Services engagement if you have active hours, or it can be scoped as a standalone micro-engagement.

  • 0 in reply to Daniel Cho (Staff)

    Anita, I'm connecting you directly with Daniel's team. You should receive a calendar invite within the hour for a 30-minute scoping call.

    As a heads up — the scoped role will require you to maintain the Team-to-user mapping in a specific format that Daniel's team will document. It's straightforward once set up, but worth planning for in your user provisioning process.

    Let me know if you need any other context before the call!