Build better products with our product team
Description -Currently, Workfront only allows delegation of approvals within a defined timeframe. There is no native capability to delegate a specific approval process to a specific person dynamically, based on the context of the request (e.g., expertise or request type). Implementing this feature would enhance flexibility by allowing approval routing based on logic-driven criteria. Why is this feature important to you - It allows dynamic routing of approvals to the most appropriate person based on their role, expertise, or responsibility. Increases process efficiency and ensures faster decision-making. Enhances the user experience by aligning approvals more closely with business logic How would you like the feature to work -1.Ability to delegate an approval process to a specific user based on a condition or request type.2.Just like there is an option to delegate for a specific timeframe, we need an option to delegate a particular request to a specific user.Current Behavior - Workfront only allows approval delegation within a specific timeframe. There is no option to dynamically assign approvers based on request data or expertise. @vmengi @venkat_suren
Description - The idea proposed is to help seamlessly connect the Issue object type with Workfront Planning records. This integration would offer a more intuitive and traceable workflow from the moment a campaign request is raised. Currently, campaign planning and execution can be fragmented, especially when the original request (issue) becomes disconnected from subsequent project records. By establishing a direct connection between the issue and the planning record—using relevant lookup fields—we enable requestors and stakeholders to get a comprehensive, real-time view of the campaign's progress. Why is this feature important to you - Campaigns often start as requests (issues) — linking them with planning records creates a seamless flow. Enables complete visibility of campaign status from request to execution. Lookup fields can show real-time progress to requestors and stakeholders. When an issue is converted to a project, the planning data remains connected — ensuring continuity. Supports better reporting: track campaign lifecycle, turnaround time, and request insights. How would you like the feature to work - 1. Enable the ability to connect Planning record to an Issue object type 2.Have lookup fields related to Issue to have a comprehensive view 3.Have an option to display Resolve Project details Current Behavior - Currently, there is no native provision to connect an Issue with a Planning record in Workfront Core. If there is a need to display the related request, it must be achieved through Workfront Fusion. The main challenge arises when attempting to populate the Issue link manually in Planning—since there is no option to make fields non-editable within Planning records, users may accidentally manipulate or overwrite the data, leading to inconsistencies and tracking issues. @deekshapai @venkat_suren
Description - I would love for requests and objects to be separate objects. We currently use a request queue for projects, but I am exploring issues and how this could work to track unplanned work while working on a project. We report on how many requests we receive a month, it would not make sense for issues to be included in this. Why is this feature important to you - To show the different types of unplanned work. I think it would be helpful to show issues that come up on projects in reporting to better allocate resources and help with future planning.How would you like the feature to work - I would like them to be separate objects.Current Behaviour - Requests and issues are considered the same object.
I would like to use the data that exists against each project, (i.e. client name, reference number, planned hours) and export it into a templated pdf. This templated pdf would then contain a header and/or footer with the relevant information you would usually associate with an invoice (company address, VAT number, contact detail, payment terms, bank account details etc). We can then use these PDFs for invoicing purposes. Exporting each report/project as a PDF already exists as a feature, so hopefully using customised templates is a relatively achievable feature WF could develop. Thanks!
It would be greatly beneficial to be able to hide "Recent Paths" (in the dropdown) when making a new Request. The "Recent Paths" listed first adds confusion to my teammates adn they can't seem to find what Request Queue they are looking for because the Recent Paths are listed at the top.
We have a lot of custom fields that naturally work well in sequences. Unfortunately we don't always use all of them in the report prompts as some are not initially needed. However when someone requests a prompt be added, I find I have to delete a lot to then build and order them in an intuitive way per the other user reports. I would love a way to drag and reorder, similar to the custom form builder.
I'm using "update" section in Workfront to convey my messages to stakeholders. Is there any option to store my custom email templates and use the same whenever necessary in update section. It would be helpful if we have such option to save time.
Description - As a user, we would like Adobe to provide us access to the robots.txt file of our analytics subdomain so we can prevent search engines from crawlingWhy is this feature important to you - Googlebot is crawling resources on our adobe hosted analytics subdomain millions of times a week. This is hurting our crawl budget, resulting in less traffic and revenue to our eCommerce sitesHow would you like the feature to work - We would like the robots.txt set to Disallow allUser-agent: * Disallow: * Current Behaviour - The robots.txt file is set to Allow AllUser-agent: * Disallow:
Workfront has done some great redevelopment of gantt chart functionality. The only (major) issue is that all gantt views whether in projects/portfolios or calendars are hard coded to calendar year. Since my company (and many others) operate on a fiscal year, we are unable to use any of the new gantt functionally as it would really confuse executives and users. The only workaround is to quickly zoom to the moth view to get quarter and year headings to disappear - very unfortunate considering how good this tool could be. An interesting solution would be to allow custom quarters to determine the date range presented on all gantt views. Please vote. Thanks! Steve
Description -This feature would introduce a new settings panel within the CJA interface for stitched(FBS/GBS) datasets. This panel would provide clear visibility into the configuration and schedule of the stitching process, including the lookback window, replay settings, and the timing of data processing runs. Why is this feature important to you -Data accuracy and trust are fundamental to our analytics practice. Without knowing when the CJA dataset was last stitched or what lookback window was used, our stakeholders cannot be confident about which day of the week contains the most complete and accurate data. This ambiguity undermines our ability to make timely, data-driven decisions. It also creates an unnecessary dependency on the Adobe support team for basic information about our own data configuration. How would you like the feature to work -Within the CJA Data View settings, there should be a new tab or section dedicated to "Stitching Configuration". This section should clearly display:Lookback Window: The currently configured lookback window setting (e.g., 7 days, 30 days).Replay Setting: The status or configuration of the replay setting.Last Run Timestamp: The exact date and time of the last successful stitching run.Next Scheduled Run: The date and time for the next planned stitching run.Ideally, this feature would also evolve to allow administrators to not only view but also configure these settings directly within the UI, moving it from a "black box" to a self-service model. Current Behaviour -Currently, the configuration of the lookback window and replay settings for stitched datasets is a black box, managed entirely by the Adobe support team. There is no visibility within the CJA platform to see what these settings are, nor is there a way to know when the next stitching process is scheduled to run. This lack of transparency forces us to guess when the data is most accurate and requires us to go through support for any changes or information.
This was submitted by one of our users: Description - If multiple people are assigned to any single task, you can't mark "Done with my part" from the Work widget on the WF homepage. It would be good to be able to do this.Why is this feature important to you - Keeps from having to shift between screensHow would you like the feature to work - Description describes the feature.
Description - When assigning a task to a team, that team can include Light Users. Light users don't have access to make assignments to others or themselves, even though they are on the team (fine, understood). However, through the UI, the user is presented with options to do so. If the user clicks on any of these options, they receive pop-up messages that make it appear as though there is an error in the system. Since the light license is restrictive, the UI should be presented differently for these users and shouldn't allow them to see options that they truly don't have access to. Why is this feature important to you - User adoption and less time on system admins explaining the errors to teams How would you like the feature to work - Change the UI at the system level by license type. Current Behaviour - Currently, the user is presented with options they don't have access to use through the system-level license types. This confuses teams and weighs heavily on user adoption. Or a simple solution would be to at least display an error message that represents the error.
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: Content managers need an ability to "Replace a file" from the asset's properties. We implemented an override for them (pictures attached). In future we'd like to have this feature as Out-of-the-box functionality. Use-case: Content manager creates an asset's language copy, then "Reveal in Asset", then goes to the asset's properties and need to Replace the original file by translated version of file, having stored it on local computer with different name. Current/Experienced Behavior: Content manager can update an asset's file by one of the 2 ways: Create a Version: Open the folder in the DAM. Find his/her asset file. Select it and click on the "+ Create" button, then select "Version" button. Replace an original file OR Create a version:Save a future image with the SAME name as an original asset's file in the DAM. Drag and drop the future image to the DAM. System suggests "Create a version" or "Replace". Improved/Expected Behavior: User Story: As a Content manager, I want to be able to "Replace a file" from the asset's properties to avoid walking through assets listing and files renaming. Acceptance criteria: Content manager can update an asset's file from the asset's properties by uploading the file from his/her local computer. Content manager can choose 2 options: "Create version" or "Replace". If "Replace" option is selected, AEM saves the file to the same directory and automatically rename uploaded file to the same name as the original asset (original file is deleted). If "Create version" option is selected, AEM creates a version of the file (original file is saved). Uploading file with different extension than original asset is not uploaded and the error is displayed. The button "Replace file" is displayed on menu above asset properties page. Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): AEM Managed Services, v6.5.14 Customer-name/Organization name: Veeam Software Screenshot (if applicable): We implemented an override for Content managers: Code package (if applicable):
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: Allow multiple VPN connections in AEMaaCS with automated failover Use-case: In case the configured VPN connection fails AEMaaCS should do an automatic failover to another configured VPN connection. Current/Experienced Behavior: Currently AEMaaCS allows only one single VPN connection (https://experienceleague.adobe.com/en/docs/experience-manager-cloud-service/content/security/configuring-advanced-networking#vpn). Improved/Expected Behavior: It should be possible to configure a second VPN connection that is used in case the VPN connection has an issue (VPN gateway not reachable). Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): AEMaaCS Customer-name/Organization name: UBS AG Screenshot (if applicable): Code package (if applicable):
Description - It does not seem logical to have a converted request/issue NOT inherit the priority from the template it was converted from, seeing as in almost all cases requests/issues originate from a request queue and are converted to a project using a template (with a priority designated in the template). Why is this feature important to you - Accuracy of defining priorities and one less step for a project manager to do when converting requests/issuesHow would you like the feature to work - request/issue should inherit the priority of the template they are converted fromCurrent Behaviour - request/issue does not inherit the priority of the template they are converted from
Allow users to set how many decimals they want data to display on matrix reports or charts (i.e. percentages on graphs, pies, etc). Or allow for rounding on charts/matrices.
Description: Provide filtering functionality when viewing events against a profile. Why is this feature important to you:Currently if I'm looking at events against a profile, either in support of query build or customer query resolution, I have to go through every event which can take a very long time. Being able to filter on things like a date, event type... would speed this process up significantly. How would you like the feature to work:Provide a filter button when viewing events against a profile with options to filter on dates and event type. Current Behaviour:Today we have to either search through every event or query in the 'View JSON'
Creating a portal which is for viewing only would really help disseminate marketo reports & dashboards across the enterprise. So, imagine I create a report for a team in sales, but these persons don't have a marketo login.I think it would be much appreciated if am able to send them a link from where they can have view only access to the reports created inside marketo.
Hello Adobe community,For those of us using Advanced BI Analytics for the enterprise, I think it's a great idea to introduce access level permissions such that we can assign specific view only, read/write, create permissions for different users of the platform. It would also be useful to have permissions for different dashboards or reports, for example, certain teams could have access to a high level dashboard but not an operational one. Such arrangement would also make it easy to find reports & dashboards. Is it a bad idea to split the dashboard platform across workspaces ? it may be for a small or mid-size business but for a company like mine, which has many business units and lots of persons with access to marketo, I don't think so. I think it's primordial if we want to avoid the chaos of having multiple users from different departments using the platform.
I frequently switch between multiple projects, each with its own priorities and workflows. However, the current behavior forces me to manually change the view every time I move from one project to another, which is both tedious and time-consuming. I’d love to have the ability to lock a specific view to each project—so when I open Project A, I see the fields, highlights, and layout tailored to that project, and when I switch to Project B, it automatically displays its own customized view. This would streamline navigation, reduce repetitive clicks, and make it much easier to focus on what matters most in each context.
Description - Create the option to schedule a send announcementWhy is this feature important to you - This will help manage a consistent cadence of communication while delivering at the best time each week, even if I'm OOO.How would you like the feature to work - Schedule send just like outlookCurrent Behaviour - There is no option for this currently.
Description - Before the migration to Adobe console, we were able to have two email addresses associated to each Workfront account. One email (FedID) is what our users used to login through SSO and the other (Username) is where their email notifications from Workfront went. With console this is now no longer possible and support has been unable to suggest a workaround. Would love to see this functionality restored! Why is this feature important to you - Some of our users need their notifications routed to a shared inbox for coverage purposes/so it is easy to jump in and help each other with workloads. How would you like the feature to work - I would like to be able to have a field on the user profile again where I can input an email to send Workfront notifications to. Current Behavior - Functionality no longer exists.
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: Currently, when a PDF component is added to a page, it restricts editing access to the components placed above and below it. This limitation affects user experience, especially during content updates or layout adjustments, as authors are unable to interact with adjacent elements without removing or repositioning the PDF component. Use-case: Current/Experienced Behavior: Currently, when a PDF component is added to a page, it restricts editing access to the components placed above and below it. This limitation affects user experience, especially during content updates or layout adjustments, as users are unable to interact with adjacent elements without removing or repositioning the PDF component. Improved/Expected Behavior: • Users should be able to freely edit, move, or configure components that are placed above or below the PDF component.• The PDF component should not block or overlay adjacent component in a way that interferes with normal page editing operations. Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): AEM 6.5.21 Customer-name/Organization name: Akzonobel Screenshot (if applicable): Code package (if applicable):
Current Behavior - Currently in Workfront, when a custom form is attached to an object, users may encounter an issue when filling out metadata—especially with fields that are associated or dependent on each other. For example, if a user selects a value in one field, which triggers the display of a related field, and then enters information in that associated field, changing the original selection does not automatically clear the data previously entered in the dependent field. As a result, the old data remains, and the user must manually go back, remove the previously selected information, and re-enter the correct details. Proposed Solution - It should automatically clear or reset the values of dependent fields when the controlling field changes.
Currently, Marketo’s report subscription feature only allows users to select the day for report delivery, without the ability to specify a time.I’d like to propose an enhancement to include a time selector within the subscription settings. This would allow users to schedule reports not just by day, but also at a specific time, enabling more precise report delivery aligned with business hours, stakeholder availability, or operational workflows.Adding this flexibility would improve usability and scheduling control, especially for teams working across different time zones or requiring reports before key meetings or decision-making windows.Thanks
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.
