Build better products with our product team
In the My Updates section, which is extremely helpful, it would be fantastic if, where someone would see the red and green buttons to approve or deny, if on the back end, we could customize the approval/denial setup to require that with either selection of approve or deny, the approver/denier would be required to enter a text explanation. (I wish that there was an option to more or less choose to turn such a feature on or off, to prompt approvers to give feedback.) This would help make sure, for auditing purposes, there was a record of explanation behind an approval.
Description - When projects are submitted the approvals should have the ability to include with their decision, the reason for their approval and/or denial. Why is this feature important to you - This feature is important to the process mostly for auditing purposes. The required comments field in the approval section would explain to the business owner why the project was declined or approval and be visible for all other parties previ to the project details. If and when completed or projects that were never approved are revisited in the future, the required comments within the approvals will give context to why the project was again, approved or denied. How would you like the feature to work - Workfront should allow the ability to include a comments section with project approvals. This feature should offer both optional as well as required capabilities. If this feature is active and required within a project's approval process, managers and sponsors should be required to include comments when approving or declining a project request - any and every time within the project an approval is needed. Current Behavior - Projects are approved and/or denied without documented reasoning or context. Reasons are communicated verbally and/or via email. We may incorporate using the updates tab.
We would like an option to enforce uniqueness on portfolio, program, and project names, respectively. Our users are able to create portfolios, programs, or projects with identical names, but won't realize that until they see them on reports. The same behavior happens via Workfront API that creates those objects. Enforcing uniqueness will eliminate this confusing behavior.
We are finally going to be able to port "Manager" in through our Azure SSO. However, there is no way to bulk map Manager email or name to their Workfront user record and so we will need to do this one by one. Unfortunately, we currently have 184 managers in our business unit that we will need to map. Having the user's Manager update whenever they log into WF will be a great add for us. It will automatically update their org chart and we will always have an accurate manager that we can trigger automatic approvals to. I would like to be able to download the usernames or user IDs from Workfront, then map the name or email address that will be passed through SSO in a template or spreadsheet that could then be uploaded to do the attribute mapping. The current behavior is that I will need to add the rule for each one, one at a time, to map the directory attribute to the Workfront attribute. So I'm guessing it will take me quite some time to do this 184 times.
Description - Would like to be able to customize the axis labels on a bar chart. Why is this feature important to you - I know this can be done by changing the name of a custom field so it reflects as we would like, but I need to be able to change the name of the "planned completion date" to an internal term for our leadership team. For example, the planned completion date field is used as our "customer go live date". How would you like the feature to work - Allow admins the ability to rename native Workfront fields on the backend so we can tailor to our organization's terminology. Current Behaviour - Not currently available. I hope this in the works for Reporting Canvas. 🤞
Request queues have the potential to solve a big need for us, the problem is you can only add them to a project as an issue. We would like to suggest the ability to add them to a project as a TASK.
When I take a look at the list of Email Campaigns / Events on Marketo Sales Insight, there exists all of the Email Campaigns / Events that is planed in the future on Marketo. But if the list only includes the related Email Campaigns / Events to the selected(showed) Account / Contact on Salesforce page, it would become more useful function, I feel.What do you think of this??
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: Create a Latam community Use-case: Current/Experienced Behavior: Find AEM certified in Latam Improved/Expected Behavior: Create community to find consultors or Developers / TA to contract. Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): Customer-name/Organization name: Screenshot (if applicable): Code package (if applicable):
Description - Moving Files Among SharePoint Repositories in Workfront Loses the Comments Why is this feature important to you - It is important because the comments on the file are important. This ought not work this way. How would you like the feature to work - When moving files among folder, the comments remain. Current Behaviour - In WF, link to a SharePoint library or folder containing two folders, A and B In WF, upload a file to A. In WF, add a comment to file in A In SharePoint, move the file to B Go back to WF, refresh, you’ll see the file in its new B location, but without the comment added in step 3.
Hi Jon/Team,I'd previously sent you a direct email about this, but figured I'd submit it this new way as well.I keep noticing that after having the Chrome extension enabled, and opening and closing enough tabs, eventually all the cores of my CPU spike to 100% and RAM usage goes through the roof. When I pop open Chrome’s Task Manager specifically, I can see that the extension is using 200%+ of the CPU (guess that means multiple cores?). Simply disabling the extension and then re-enabling it drops CPU usage down to single digits and restores RAM usage to a sensible level. (Side note: you can ignore the “Extension: Page Analytics (by Google)” part in the example screenshot below; I’ve also seen the “Adobe Experience Platform Debugger” with “LastPass: Free Password Manager”. It seems like the common Task with the spike is the AEPD extension)The unfortunate side effect here is that if I don’t catch the issue quick enough, it can cause system wide performance issues. I’ve even seen it crash the graphics drivers (when all the memory gets used up) and that throws application windows all over the place (changes their size and monitor placement) when the graphics drivers are restarted. 😞Heh, I should probably mention that I really like the new version … even with the issue I’m seeing! 🙂If there’s anything I can do to help you with the issue I see, please let me know!
Description - As a System Administrator, there isn't any location where I can see the entire list of data fields that are available and can be reported on within Workfront. (currently, I can only see a list of the custom form fields that I create via Main Menu > Set Up > Custom Forms -- then scrolling to the Fields list Why this feature is important - Administrators should have a single location where they can assess everything that can possibly be reported on within the system. Today, the only way that an Admin can find this information is by creating a project/task/issue/etc. report and scrolling through all of the available options to add as a column. In addition, the "custom form fields" info allows me to see a list of all the reports where I use certain custom form fields--it would be a huge benefit to see this information for the "native" Workfront fields. How the feature could work - Adding an additional section within the "Setup" screen where there would be a list of Reportable Data (similar how you can see all of the available filters) Current Behavior - It doesn't exist.
nation.marketo.com/t5/product-discussions/people-performance-report-group-by Hello! "Group By" is a feature of People Performance Report Settings that cannot be removed. But in some - actually in most - cases where we have A) Custom Columns and/or B) a Smart List filter on that report, we don't want any grouping and would love to delete it - which we can't. See also: nation.marketo.com/t5/product-discussions/people-performance-report-group-by Thanks!
Our instance of Workfront has upwards of 15K requesters. This makes it is a bit cumbersome when needing to tag or create assignments for my team of 15. It would be lovely to easily find my team for work assignments. Recommendation would be the ability to favorite or star those user profiles in their user accounts.
All of the clients we work with are loaded as Companies in Workfront, and we have set persons that always fulfill a particular role within a project for a given client (e.g. Jane Smith is always the Graphic Designer for Company XYZ). We'd like to be able to have persons auto-assigned to tasks within projects based upon what Job Role a task is for, and what Company the project is assigned to. We have tried setting up Agile teams, but this does not serve the same purpose. Moreover, we do not want the assigned persons to have to "claim" or say that they will work on a task - we are looking for it to be assigned automatically. This would greatly reduce overhead for our PMs when opening up new projects.
Users need the ability to add notes when logging time at the task level and on home screen. You can add notes in the timesheets section but it would be much more helpful to add the notes in real time while logging at the other two options instead of logging time, then moving to timesheet only to add a note.
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: Content Fragment creation wizard to have option to allow only few models and not all. Use-case: When author tries to create a new CF, he/she should be able to control the models that should be populated on creation wizard. Current/Experienced Behavior: Currently, when creating a CF, we see a huge list of CF models available, which is cumbersome for author to scroll through all of them. Currently, there is option to search using browser or add customizations using additional clientlibs but would be better experience if taken care in product functionality. Improved/Expected Behavior: Pagination or Tagging or OOTB Search or having allowed models can help. Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): All AEM versions supporting CFs Customer-name/Organization name: Adobe Screenshot (if applicable): Code package (if applicable):
Looking for a functionality similar to Excel for a "Find and Replace" within a project or template. For example if I've labeled multiple tasks "Client Review" but want to replace it with "External Review" I can find and replace that text easily.
Description: Walgreens is required to generate access reports for the consumer by reporting data based on the lookback period requirements for the residency state of the consumer. Currently, Adobe reports all data to Walgreens when a customer's request is sent from Walgreens to Adobe. Current behavior: Walgreens sends the request to Adobe with the below parameters. Adobe takes 4-7 days to process the request and return the report. { "profileId": "ŴfĤþ-ÒÏĽ(~Īİ", "date": "10-27-2022", } How would you like the feature to work - Walgreens will send the below parameters to the same Adobe service URL. Adobe to report all data between ‘date’ and ‘reportStartDate’ If ‘reportStartDate’ has a value of ‘00-00-0000’ then report all data stored in Adobe. Request attributes sample: "profileId": "ŴfĤþ-ÒÏĽ(~Īİ", "date": "10-27-2022", "splState": "CA/VA/CO/CT", "reportStartDate": "01-01-2022" Adobe serviceUrl: h target=_blankttps://platform.adobe.io/data/core/privacy/jobs Glossary: profileId – Customer profile Id date – Report requested date reportStartDate – Lookback period date till which the report has to be looked back splState – Residency state of the consumer
In Latin America, we have different currencies, but at the same time each country has clients from different parts of the world, so it would be better to be able to assign the currency by portfolio and not at the LATAM level.At this moment when we enter a portfolio, everything has the Brazilian currency by default, not which complicates visualizing the financial calculations of each country.
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: It would be excellent if multiple pages under one path could be selected and moved together. Currently only one page can be selected and moved at a time. It seems like the interface and behind-the-scenes processing is already capable of most of the heavy lifting, as a page with hundreds of children can be moved; just not multiple individual pages. Use-case: This feature would be a huge time-saver in situations like: breaking a section of a site into multiple sections closing down a section of a site and redistributing the child pages among a few remaining sections breaking a small news or event hierarchy into a more robust by-year or by-month structure (e.g. sorting 100 articles into 2020, 2021, 2022 folders) moving lots of pages into a folder (e.g. move 100 pages under a new "archived" page) Current/Experienced Behavior: When selecting one page, a "Move" button appears in the toolbar. When selecting more than one, "Move" disappears. Improved/Expected Behavior: When selecting more than one page, "Move" should keep showing. When used, the rest of the interface for choosing the destination, reviewing and updating references will work as-is. Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): AEM 6.5 SP12 Customer-name/Organization name: University at Buffalo Screenshot (if applicable): Code package (if applicable):
Hi there!I would love to see a button on the global navigation area to "log in as". While testing/setup/helping a user it requires clicking setup and scrolling down to "log in as" another user. Having this as a button would speed up the process and make it easier for the admins! Yay admins!!Thanks!Chuck
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: The OOTB rollout functionality does not provide any notification or messaging on failed or skipped item, all of them will say successful even though some were not processed. As a result, technical person need to triage the rollout line by line to identify the issue and error in order to fix. Use-case: Current/Experienced Behavior: The rollout functionality shows all items were process, even though some items were failed or skipped. Improved/Expected Behavior: Proper messaging to notify content author which item has failed/skipped roll out and the reasoning. Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): Customer-name/Organization name: Screenshot (if applicable): Code package (if applicable):
Hi, Something that has been confusing our users is a message they receive when downloading assets in bulk. When they hit "Download," they see a green message that says, "Your download is generating, and will appear in your inbox when ready." Our users see the word "inbox" and think, "this is going into my Outlook or email inbox." So they sit and wait around for an email that never comes. Little do they know, until they ask me, that the "inbox" is different. Totally confusing. Anyone else also find this confusing? Thanks!
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: Improve the UI of user group management in Touch UI Use-case: Authors managing user permissions Current/Experienced Behavior: Current UI can be confusing and hard to read Improved/Expected Behavior: New UI is simplified and made less confusing Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): AEM 6.5 SP 13 Customer-name/Organization name: Qantas In 6.5 the group management UI can be very confusing compared to 6.3. The UI by default shows all group memberships, including those inherited by other groups. This can be surprising compared to 6.3 which only shows explicit memberships and it makes it a lot less clear what groups the user belongs to. Additionally, the only visual distinction between assigned and inherited group memberships is that the remove button is greyed out on the latter, which is visually very difficult to tell apart and is a bad indicator of which one is which. I'd like to propose two different solution for this: 1) Instead of greying out the remove button on inherited groups, the button should just be hidden altogether. That would make it very clear which groups can and can't be removed manually. 2) Add a checkbox to filter out the inherited groups. I'd suggest making this disabled by default so it mirrors the 6.3 functionality, then users can optionally check it in order to view the inherited groups that a user has. Current 6.5 UI (it is very hard to visually distinguish the valid and invalid remove buttons). 6.5 UI with buttons removed (as you can see it is far easier to tell which groups are removable. To improve the UI layout maybe the explicit groups can be sorted to the top so that the buttons aren't at random intervals)
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: Related Case #E-000797571 Use-case: We noticed recently the new warning message added to AEM bulk edit scenario, where user attempt to “Select all” and edit these sub-pages in separate tabs. The warning message says that “Bulk action not supported, The selected action Edit(e) will only have effect X selected items currently loaded…”. As we understand, the justification for that warning message is to let user know that not all sub pages might have been lazy-loaded, and that’s fine. That also explains why the massage doesn’t need to appear when pages have been selected manually. The point is that the mentioned logic might be confusing when there are only few sub-pages to be selected by “select all”. In that case lazy logic is not the case and user can be sure that “select all” picks all the sub pages we have on the screen. Please consider extending that logic, because our customers feels uncomfortable with new behavior and confusing warning. (More detail you can find in thread for Case #E-000797571) Current/Experienced Behavior: Warning message for few pages selected by "select all" Improved/Expected Behavior: For the scenario when only few sub pages exist, warning message is not necessary, even if pages were selected by "select all" Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): Adobe Experience Manager (6.5.15.0) Customer-name/Organization name: Wundenmanthompson's customer Screenshot (if applicable): Code package (if applicable):
Already have an account? Login
No account yet? Create an account
Enter your E-mail address. We'll send you an e-mail with instructions to reset your password.
