Build better products with our product team
Description - Add the ability to assign more than one user to Program manager and Project ownerWhy is this feature important to you - This would help our agency in sharing responsibilities and coverage.How would you like the feature to work - Just as in a task you can assign multiple users, allow this feature for Project Owner and Program ManagerCurrent Behaviour - Only one user can be assigned as Project Owner and Program Manager
It has come to my attention that some Company records remain in the database, but are not visible any longer, even via the API. This is the use case: A lead gets created with some Company fields populated (e.g. via a form fill). To store these Company values a record is created on the Company table, with the externalCompanyId remaining blank. This is much the same as modern CRMs like Salesforce and Dynamics work. If the lead goes stale and gets deleted from Marketo the Company record actually remains behind and is not deleted along with the person record. These Company records with a blank externalCompanyId are not accessible via the normal REST API endpoint and can therefore not be deleted in any way. With a native integration this can of course be managed via the native sync and in most cases these ghost records are simply clutter and not in the way of anything. However, with custom object connections this can sometimes cause problems when something unexpected happens. It would be great if simply all Company records are available via the API so proper housekeeping can be maintained.
Currently, there is no option to export any data from Workload Balancer in classic UI. It would be great to export the data - availability, planned hours & allocation for users grouped by projects.
Description - Allow the FTE number to be flexible on the user to allow for businesses that have peaks in valleys in work to adjust throughout the year. Why is this feature important to you - Our team works in a very fast paced environment and we need to be able to have the FTE number be flexible. We usually have a baseline FTE set for our teams for the valley's in the system, but when we hit peak work seasons, we ramp up the FTE to be a higher number. Being able to have multiple FTE numbers on a user for a certain period of time would allow for much better reporting. We have found a way in WF to get this to work current state through a project to track our teams peaks and valleys, but the workload balancer does not account for the change in availability of user when we switch from valleys to peaks which leads to confusion when assigning work. How would you like the feature to work - Allow a user to have multiple FTE's set on their account. Allow fields that are time bound for when those FTE's will be used to account for peaks and valleys. Once this is added, the workload balancer needs to be revised to allow this change to accurately reflect the capacity hours of a user when switching from peaks and valleys. Current Behaviour - We only have 1 FTE number available on a user.
When using the "member of program" constraint, it may be very useful and powerful to be able to select all members of webinars or members of "gated content" programs. Typical usage would be selecting all leads who are successes in webinar and put them in a nurturing program.And yet, the appropriate constraint does not exist.Please add it.My 2 cents,Greg
Description - Currently, we have to manually export Classification Data. This is cumbersome and causes dependency on admins to export periodically. We would like to have a solution to have this scheduled periodically similar to data feeds and reduce the dependency on manual solutionsWhy is this feature important to you - This feature is important part of the Data Lake we are building as it contains the Campaign InformationHow would you like the feature to work - During the configuration of the FTP export, we would like to have an option to schedule it daily, weekly, monthly Current Behavior - Currently, this option is not available.
Description - Experience Platform Data Collection (Launch) - Please add a way to duplicate/push current production build to Staging or Development environments. Why is this feature important to you - Large organizations with multiple dev teams working on new stuff / updates to existing stuff. Especially when it involves Extensions that cannot be reverted once upgraded (because..reasons?) vs. regular regression testing for sprints. Certain envs have designated Launch Dev env tags. No easy way to revert their builds to what is currently upstream (stage, prod) for regression testing cycles. How would you like the feature to work - On the Publishing view, in the Staging and Production columns (Submitted/Approved/Published), where the staging/prod builds are listed. In the top right triple dot action dropdowns (or clicking on the card and going into the build's details). Add an option to copy that build to a dev env build. Current Behaviour - Currently it is not possible to duplicate what is currently in Staging/Production environment builds, except to manually go through all Rules/DE's/Extensions and manually update. In the case of Extensions, it's not possible to revert upgrades at all.
Description - 1 - Ability to have a recurring task automatically created on a specified schedule. Examples: A new recurring task is created each week, twice a week on specific days, once a month, etc. 2 - Ability to have a recurring task automatically created once you complete the previous recurring task. Example: Configure a recurring weekly or Monthly task. When you complete the first task, then another task is automatically created for the next week or month based on specified configurations (Duration, Planned Hours, Naming, Etc.) Why is this feature important to you -When creating recurring tasks for an entire year or quarter having a list of dozens to hundreds tasks are overwhelming. We could apply filters to show only Can Start tasks or tasks due within a specified timeframe or have custom reports. However, it is inconvenient to have to switch between task filters between projects. Current State -When creating recurring tasks, you only have the option to create all of the recurring tasks at once.
Idea for Sales Insight Actions - It would be nice to have an API available or a connection for us to sync content from Salesforce to Sales Insight Actions so that we don't have Users manually adding possibly outdated content to Actions. I understand there is a content lockdown functionality but since we already have a source of truth for our content, it would be nice to be able to sync the content instead of re-loading them all to Actions each time the content is updated. We want to sync content that is already approved from Salesforce (or another source or truth) to Actions. Thanks.
Description -Why is this feature important to you - We never want user to have the ability to delete project update comments however, there are times when a user needs to remove their document/proof comments. Need the granular functionality to keep project update comments, while allowing users the ability to delete document/proof comments.How would you like the feature to work - See aboveCurrent Behaviour - Unchecking the "Never allow users to delete comments" setting will indeed grant users the ability to delete both proof/document comments and project update comments.Unfortunately, the current settings don't offer a granular control for that distinction. The "Never allow users to delete comments" option applies universally to all comment types, including project updates.
I saw back in 2020 someone posted this but it didn't get many upvotes. Not sure how many teams us the 'Planner' in resourcing but i learned on a call recently that it will soon be phasing out / no longer be supported. The biggest thing about the planner is that you can EXPORT the data. Removing the planner will only leave the Workload balancer, which currently has no ability to be exported. Although i can do a task report, this area would be a great way for me to export weekly information easily and visually pleasing for certain teams. Would love to at least get the functionality of exporting into the Workload balancer if the Planner is going away. Thanks!
Description - We can duplicate modules in Fusion. It's frustrating that we cannot do the same with filters. Why is this feature important to you - We all know what it's like when you're working on a Scenario and then you realize you need a filter to be on the other side of a module. Unfortunately, there isn't a way to move this like a module. Instead, you have to rebuild it. And, depending upon the complexity of the filter, it can be a pain. (I'm encountering this right now.) How would you like the feature to work - Just like you can clone a module, you should be able to copy/paste a filter. Current Behaviour - It doesn't do that and it's extremely annoying.
Description - Ability to create an Exclusion using two or more rules Why is this feature important to you - To exclude content that meets two criteria e.g. Video items (type) Longer than 10 minutes (duration). We still want to include Audio items Longer than 10 minutes in recommendations. How would you like the feature to work - Enable Save As Exclusions from Catalog Search or ability to add a second rule on the Exclusions screen Current Behaviour - You can only set one rule in the Exclusion rule builder and Catalog Search with two rules cannot be saved (Save As greyed out).
Description - Checkbox and Dropdown fields currently allow for the entry of single or multiple values by the end user. In these instances it would be beneficial for the admin to set a minimum and maximum number of required choices.Why is this feature important to you - Having more control over the type and quantity of information being entered into Workfront will give better accuracy over the data / reporting coming out of Workfront. There are many occasions where we may want a user to indicate more than one choice, but not be able to select every choice in the list.How would you like the feature to work - When creating or editing a Checkbox or Dropdown field, the admin would see two additional options: "Set minimum number of choices" and "Set maximum number of choices". Each option (respectively) would allow the admin to set a minimum number of selectable choices, and/or a maximum number of selectable choices.For example, an admin might build a Checkbox field which states "Indicate between 2 and 3 OKR's which will be addressed by this project." The admin could supply a list of 6 OKR's, and check off the minimum and maximum choices option, setting the minimum to 2 and the maximum to 3. When a user is presented with the field on a custom form, they would be required to check off at least 2 choices, and would not be able to check off more than 3 choices.Current Behavior - When creating a Checkbox field, any (all) choices are able to be selected. No additional customization is possible. When creating a Dropdown field, a single choice is selectable by default but the admin can enable the option to "Allow more than one option to be selected."
Business Requirement/Justification: For a Financial Organization, Security and Governance is a critical component in any solution that deals with its Customer data.To comply with internal Governance policies, we have different teams managing “User Access” and “Any Product Configuration and usage” activities.The Governance team which manages “User Access” do not have the technical knowledge on AEP or CJA to carry out activities like “Creating Connections” and “Data Views”.The team who has the knowledge of AEP and CJA are not authorized to deal with “User Access Management” activities as it is against our Governance policy. But for CJA, these two activities are coupled together and Only Product Admin has the ability to “Creating Connections” and “Data Views” along with an ability to “Grant New User Access or Remove Exiting” and “Create Product Profiles”.Hence, we want to decouple these 2 broad activities and let regular Product Users have the ability to “Create Connections and Data Views” (and manage the access within the Product Profiles) and limit any “User Management” privileges.Impact: If core AEP/CJA team is given access to Product Admin access. We run the risk of not being compliant with our Governance Policies and Process.If not, We will continue to have delays and ongoing challenges to get any Connections and Data Views configured. (THIS IS CURRENTLYT ONE OF THE LIMITING FACTOR TO IMPROVE ADOPTION OF THE SOLUTION.)Currently, this is done in working sessions/meetings were the CJA user guides Governance team member to carry out certain activities.This is not scalable and not efficient approach, as it is difficult to have required team’s availability and requires multiple people to do the same job.
Description - when communicating within Updates on any level in workfront, it would be great to have the functionality to copy/paste a screenshot into the update section. Why is this feature important to you - provides a visual aide when communicating How would you like the feature to work - simple copy/paste into update section, or add ability to attach to update section Current Behaviour - no option to do this, so team resorts to using outside systems like outlook, Teams.
Description - Can the Data Dictionary listing for a variable include the settings around the variable (expiration, list enabled, etc.)? That way, non-admins can have easy access to the most current settings, without relying on an administrator to document either outside the tool or paste into the description.Why is this feature important to you - At large companies, there can be many analysts who do not have visibility to administrative settings for variables. Admins typically document these settings outside the tool, but that can easily become outdated (and requires that the analyst knows where to access the information). Admins can now add these descriptions manually to the Data Dictionary, but that will be quite tedious, can become outdated quickly, and is prone to human error.How would you like the feature to work - in the listing per variable, automatically include the settings information (allocation, expiration, type, list support, pathing enablement, etc.)Current Behaviour - Admins typically document these settings outside the tool, but that can easily become outdated (and requires that the analyst knows where to access the information).
Description - Currently based on the system's structure, in order for our team to pull in a detailed calendar/ tracker view for planning, we have to indicate those line items/ details on a planning project form. This is a confusing and extra clicks for the team from the current process of being able to easily add / delete line items to a tracker view. This is to also address the valid business needs where things change last minute and the team needs to easily be able to action. Why is this feature important to you - This will increase adoption & overall efficiency for our teams as they work compared to their current/ previous process prior to Workfront How would you like the feature to work - User should be able to see an option to add / delete directly on the report to add additional line items OR there should be a new feature launched in WF that allows for the ability to create and easily maintain trackers similar to Smartsheets, google docs, etc. This would allow the teams to pull in more work streams/ processes into a single tool. Current Behavior - Currently based on the system's structure, in order for our team to pull in a detailed calendar/ tracker view for planning, we have to indicate those line items/ details on a planning project form. Teams can only edit inline on the report but not add/ delete from that view. See screen shots for new process within Workfront.
It would be great if we could custom sort data in a report's summary tab. For example, I'm running an hours report, grouped by week. I'm trying to show the summary tab with the weeks sorted with the most recent week on top; however, there currently isn't a way to do that in Workfront.
Description - We need to be able to send assets(videos, images and docs) & metadata from Workfront to Widen and the other way around, according to the Adobe Support team they let us know the following:It looks like the Widen Integration was a supported out-of-the-box integration at one point, but was removed fairly quickly due to Widen changing some of their API This Widen Integration was removed and made unsupported in 2020 The reason that Widen still shows as a possible value for the externalIntegrationType field is so that documents linked with the Widen integration did not break. And we also know from Widen support team that Widen has new v2 APIs; however, it still supports v1 APIs. We have a need for OTB native connection to Widen. Why is this feature important to you -At HP Inc, we are using Workfront as our Project Management tool for Marketing Organization, we will have maybe more than 1K users if we manage to make it work as expected, the connection to Widen is indispensable as it is our DAM, and we need the possibility to send assets and metadata from Workfront to Widen and the other way around.
We would like to be able to print name badges at our event check-ins with the Marketo app.
Description - Currently there is no way for our clients (who are "external users" in Workfront) to view their proofs on a mobile device. The current Workfront mobile app does have some proofing capabilities but you must have a Workfront login to access. We would love someway for our clients to be able to review proofs on a mobile device (ipad/cellphone/etc). Why is this feature important to you -Our clients are busy and being able to review proofs on the go would help expedite feedback and streamline review process. Some clients also use just an ipad for their business hub (no computer) leaving the our proofing process unusable. How would you like the feature to work -Either proofs (including interactive) open naturally some how on a mobile device (ie in a web browser) or there is an app for reviewing that does not require an actual Workfront login. Current Behavior - Limited mobile proofing capabilities, must have a Workfront login to utilize.
Description - We've limited some of our users (group A) with the restriction (Never inherit document access from projects, tasks, issues, etc....) What workfront did was these images on updates was much like documents and so when the user adds an image to the update where group A was already included, they still don't see the image because the image is a document and did not inherit the permission of the thread! But there's no way to change the sharing permissions of the image to allow group A to see it either! The function needs to be corrected so that the document (image) inherit permissions on the updates thread or give us a button to actually share the image. Why is this feature important to you - there's no button to change the sharing permissions.How would you like the feature to work - The function needs to be corrected so that the document (image) inherit permissions on the updates thread or give us a button to actually share the image.
Description - When using the Assignments object to display Issues by Assignee for a specific Queue Topic, we were advised by Workfront to utilize Breadcrumbs as a text mode filter. e.g., DE:opTask:queueTopicBreadcrumb=ExampleDE:opTask:queueTopicBreadcrumb_Mod=cicontains Unfortunately, the performance of our reports becomes very slow when utilizing this filter. While we can use other objects to report on assignment (e.g., Issues), the accuracy of those reports is lower (e.g., Issue may be assigned to multiple assignees which is not depicted accurately in the Issues object). Why is this feature important to you - This is important for our organization as the performance of the report is very slow; sometimes the report results will time out. How would you like the feature to work - (A) Allow Queue Topic as Filter on the Assignments Object in reference to Issues. (B) Adjust/resolve the performance of Breadcrumbs in filtering. (C) Provide a field/item/attribute to allow reporting of multiple Assignees to an Issue on the Issues object
Description - Make Proof capability available in Sandbox 1 Why is this feature important to you - We can't test our end to end workflow in any dev environment because at least one key function is missing in any environment. If Proof could be available in Sandbox 1, Sandbox 1 would be very close to mirroring our prod environment. How would you like the feature to work - Make Proof capability available in Sandbox 1 Current Behaviour - Proof cannot be made available in SB01. It is only available in Preview. Preview is not helpful for testing dev work since things that are built out in preview are erased every week.
Already have an account? Login
Enter your E-mail address. We'll send you an e-mail with instructions to reset your password.
Sorry, we're still checking this file's contents to make sure it's safe to download. Please try again in a few minutes.
Sorry, our virus scanner detected that this file isn't safe to download.
