Build better products with our product team
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
Currently, Marketo does not provide real-time notifications for individual CRM sync errors. Instead, error notifications are compiled and sent to subscribed users once per day.This means that if any record fails to sync with Salesforce (or another connected CRM), there is no immediate alert or notification at the time the error occurs. As a result, sync issues may go unnoticed for several hours, potentially delaying remediation and impacting campaign execution, lead routing, or reporting accuracy.Implications:Sync failures are only visible in daily summary emails or within the Marketo Notification section.Manual monitoring of high-priority workflows or critical leads may be required if timely resolution is needed.So Just had an idea that the real time notification should be there for the same. I know in this case use can got lots of alerts if it's happened but still there should be a way to notify use at least hourly basis.Thanks,
Description - The project name is no longer a link that will allow me to look at the project before assigning it to someone. That is something that used to be there, but went away with this recent fix.Why is this feature important to you - This feature is important because having the project name as a clickable hyperlink in the widget allowed us to quickly access project details before assigning tasks. It helped ensure we had the right context and reduced the chances of misassignments. Removing this functionality adds extra steps to our workflow and impacts efficiency, especially when managing a high volume of requests. Restoring it would significantly improve usability and productivity.How would you like the feature to work - We would like the project name in the widget to function as a clickable hyperlink, similar to how the task name works currently. Clicking the project name should open the project in a new tab or window, allowing us to quickly view its details without navigating away from the current page. This would help streamline our workflow by providing immediate access to relevant project information before making assignment decisions.Current Behaviour - In the current setup, only the task name appears as a clickable hyperlink in the widget. The project name is displayed as plain text and is no longer a link. As a result, users are unable to directly access the project from the widget, which limits their ability to quickly review project details before assigning tasks.
Description - Within Monitoring > Dashboard > Profiles > Any failed dataflow ingestion to Unified Profile Store > "Error Summary" Why is this feature important to you - Troubleshooting Ingestion failures to UPS as a developer, since many times the error is based on data quality checks.How would you like the feature to work - A slightly more helpful error code can be found with the catalog API at the batches/ GET endpoint under the "errors" object array, and the payload also displays the corresponding batch ID when that error occurred. So instead of current behavior, displaying the error from the error array. Current Behaviour - Currently, batch ingestion failures to the UPS displays"UPINGT-007002-500: There was an error, the profile batch ingest job failed. Please contact UPS support" for most ingestion errors. This error summary is too generic for Developers to take action on before contacting Adobe support.
Description -When using external lookup fields in Workfront (e.g., dropdowns that fetch values from external systems via webhook), there's currently no way to know which Workfront object or record the user is editing or interacting with when the webhook call is triggered. This limitation hinders the ability to tailor results or logic based on the specific context of the Workfront record, such as a project, task, or custom form.Why is this feature important to you - As an integration architect working extensively with Workfront Fusion and other middleware platforms, we frequently design experiences where dynamic dropdowns should return context-aware results. For example, showing different vendor lists, funding sources, or templates based on the portfolio, project type, or requestor. Without knowing which Workfront record the user is interacting with, we are forced to build complex workarounds, cache lookups, or create duplicative forms, all of which introduce fragility and increase cost and implementation time. This change would enable smarter, more responsive external lookups and unlock a wide range of enterprise use cases.How would you like the feature to work - When a user interacts with an external lookup field and the webhook is triggered, Workfront should include the context of the record (e.g., record ID, object type, or other related metadata) in either the HTTP headers or the body payload of the webhook request. Ideally, this would be configurable so admins can choose to send fields like projectID, customFormID, or even specific custom field values (e.g., selected portfolio or request type) to allow for contextual logic in the receiving system or Fusion scenario.Current Behaviour - Currently, Workfront external lookup webhooks send no identifying information about the record or object the field is on. This results in a "blind" call to the external system with no context, preventing the use of record-specific logic, filtering, or validation in the external lookup response.
Description:Introduce a "Pause" functionality for journeys, allowing temporary halts without permanently stopping them. This would help address short-term issues while preserving the integrity of the journey data. Why is this feature important to you:A "Pause" feature provides flexibility in managing journeys by enabling quick fixes without disrupting the entire process. It ensures that IDs remain consistent and avoids mixing or fragmenting reports, which is essential for accurate performance analysis. How would you like the feature to work:The system should include a "Pause" button alongside the existing "Run," "Stop," and "Close" options. When paused, the journey should retain its current state and resume seamlessly once issues are resolved, with all IDs and reporting data remaining intact. Current Behaviour:Currently, the only available options are to run, close, or stop a journey. Stopping a journey disrupts continuity, alters IDs, and complicates reporting, making it difficult to manage temporary interruptions effectively.
Description - Projected Date fields on projects and tasks dynamically update as progress is made (or not made) which is great, especially when using workload balancer. However, Projected Dates on issues do not work the same way. It is possible to have projected dates on issues that are in the past, causing them to "disappear" from the current view in the workload balancer.Why is this feature important to you - This makes measuring true workload extremely difficult. Instead, we have to manually change the planned dates, which causes us to lose the original data, making it impossible to measure true turnaround rates.How would you like the feature to work - The projected dates on issues should work just like they do on tasks.Current Behaviour - https://experienceleague.adobe.com/en/docs/workfront/using/manage-work/projects/plan-a-project/project-projected-completion-date#:~:text=Issues%3A%20The,the%20Commit%20Date
Hi, I wanted to suggest adding a new filter option in the dropdown for time frames. Currently Marketo has the below: 1. "is" (Specific date)2. "is not" (specific date)3. "between" (b/w specific dates)4. in past (one filter - such as past 30 days)5. in time frame (today, yesterday....)6. after (specific date)7.before (specific date)8. on or after (specific date)9. on or before (specific date) I’d like to recommend a new filter that allows users to select a range within relative time frames. For example, filter data between "past 3 months" and "past 1 month", effectively capturing a 2-month window.Currently, this can be achieved by combining two separate filters. A dedicated option would simplify this process. Let me know what you think 😄
I have challenges where I want to create a smart list with date constraints, but because it does not allow me to use "in past before" or "in future after" in the date constraint section, I have to manually adjust that every month instead of automating it. for example, I want to create a smart list of people who filled out a form in past before 2 months. To accomplish this I have to do "or or before" and set a specific date, and every 30 days, go back and update the date. The fact that I can't say "filled out a form in past before 2 months" and have to constantly go back and update the date is silly and frustrating.
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: Enhance filtering capabilities in Content Hub Collections to allow filtering by "Created By" (specific users, not just "me" or "anyone") and by "Creation Date". Use-case: Our client uses Collections extensively to organize and share digital assets. To efficiently manage and locate relevant Collections, they need to filter by the specific user who created a Collection and by the date it was created. This is especially important in collaborative environments with many contributors. Current/Experienced Behavior: Currently, the filtering options in Collections are limited to "Created by me" or "Created by anyone", without the ability to specify a particular user or filter by creation date. Improved/Expected Behavior: Users should be able to: Select a specific user from a list or input field to filter Collections by creator. Define a date range to narrow down the list of Collections. Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): AEM Assets as a Cloud Service – Content Hub Customer-name/Organization name: Client : Audemars Piguet / Inegrator : Valtech Screenshot (if applicable): Code package (if applicable):
UI Description:The current Fusion UI does not prompt for confirmation before deleting a scenario. Additionally, there is no visual indication of which scenario is selected for deletion, and deleted scenarios cannot be restored via the UI.Why this feature is important:Accidental deletion of scenarios can result in lost work and require significant time to rebuild. Without a confirmation prompt or a visual highlight, it’s easy to misclick and remove the wrong scenario. Since the UI offers no recovery option, this can lead to irreversible loss.How this feature would work:When a user clicks the delete icon for a scenario, a confirmation modal should appear asking, "Are you sure you want to delete this scenario?" The scenario line item should be highlighted when hovered over or selected for deletion, so the user clearly sees which scenario is being targeted. Optionally, an "Undo" notification or a soft-delete feature (trash bin or restore option) would add an extra layer of protection.Current behavior:Clicking the delete icon immediately removes the scenario with no warning or visual confirmation of which scenario is being deleted. There is no way to restore a deleted scenario through the UI.
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: Add a "Shared Links" interface in Content Hub with enhanced link management capabilities. Use-case: Users need a centralized interface to manage all their public shared links within Content Hub. This includes editing, reactivating, and searching links, as well as setting default expiration rules. These features are essential for maintaining control over public asset distribution and improving collaboration. Current/Experienced Behavior: Currently, Content Hub does not provide a dedicated interface for managing shared links (Private and Public). Users cannot view or edit their previously generated links, nor can they see links shared by others. There is no way to search/filter shared links, reactivate expired ones, or set a default expiration period. Improved/Expected Behavior: A dedicated "Shared Links" interface accessible from the Content Hub UI. At least for public shared links. Users can: Edit their own shared links (e.g., change expiration date). Reactivate expired links. View links shared by other users (with appropriate permissions). Search and filter shared links by asset name, user, date, etc. Set a custom default expiration date for public links (e.g., 1 year). Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): AEM Assets as a Cloud Service : Content Hub Customer-name/Organization name: Client : Audemars Piguet / Integrator : Valtech Screenshot (if applicable): Code package (if applicable):
Description - We do have multiple admins in our Fusion team, who all get an email notification if a scenario fails. So far so good.It would be nice if you could temporarily pause these notifications for a specific scenario so as not to alert colleagues if an error occurs during modifying and testing the scenario.Why is this feature important to you - To be able to modify an active scenario without alerting team admins in case of an error.How would you like the feature to work - It would help to have a "Pause notifications" button, which stays active for an amount of time, or just a manual switch.Current Behaviour - Any admin gets notified, what leads to confusion, if not communicated, that someone is working on the scenario.
As we continue to use forms within the tool and require access to view submission data, we've identified a need for the creation of multiple people views that can be shared with our users. This enhancement would eliminate the necessity for each user to individually set up their own views, promoting greater standardization and consistency across our instance. We kindly ask you to consider adding this shared view feature as a potential enhancement in upcoming updates. Thank you!
Just like we can delegate project/task/issue approvals, and with 22.3 can delegate task/issue assignments, PLEASE have the ability to delegate proof approvals! There are other ideas for this with 'Not Planned' labeled, hoping power in numbers can help sway this bc this is something WF really needs. Hoping it is part of near-future proof enhancements.
At the moment the designed solution is that when a Workfront user who has access to a project to which a proof has been added and who the proof has not been explicitly shared before opens the proof from within Workfront, they are added to the proof immediately afterwards. This is a poorly designed system setting. Just because a user clicks on a proof to open it does not mean that they should be added to the proofing process. Users should decide who and when someone is added to a proof. If a user clicks on a proof but is not part of the proofing process, they should be able to view it without having to become a reviewer. This is especially annoying for system admins and project managers who are just trying to see where something is at in a project and aren't actually involved in the review process.
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: Allow Adobe logs forward to IP-whitelsting-enabled client Splunk setups Use-case: Customer Splunk setups have HEC IP whitelisting set up; AEM logs forwarding cannot be enabled currently, according to Adobe support. Current/Experienced Behavior: AEM logs forwarding cannot be enabled currently, according to Adobe support, as the egress IPs from adobe side are dynamic Improved/Expected Behavior: Adobe can provide IP range(s) to whitelist on Customer Splunk side, allowing the logs forwarding Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): AEMaaCS Customer-name/Organization name: multiple clients Screenshot (if applicable): - Code package (if applicable): -
Current Behaviour:The delegate feature is only available from the "My Work" home widgetHow would you like the feature to work:Move this feature to a User profile tab or any other dedicated page Why is this feature important to you:We often set-up custom homepages for users bypassing the standard Homepage for user experience and work efficiency
Description - I would like to be able to attach a custom form to proof templates. Why is this feature important to you - This would be more efficient when using proof approvals for various businesses/products as we could select the associated template and it would automatically pull in the correct details. How would you like the feature to work - We use Issues within a project for proof approvals on product packaging. We would like to be able to pull in specific details to a product or business with each proof created and tying the proof template to a custom form would make this process easier. Current Behavior - Currently, we have to manually add a custom form to the proof, in the document details and add the details each time as they are different for different products/businesses.
Description - When building a freeform table with a subset of a dimension (either using a filter, using display only selected rows, or dropping individual dimension items), if you try to make a line/area visualization that is trended over time from the summary row it uses the entire dimension and not just the items that you've dragged in. This is a problem because it isn't accurately trending the dimension items that you have selected, it is including information that is not in the table and leads to an inaccurate representation. You can see here, with the header/summary row selected, it's trending the entire dimension, because the total for some of the single days in the line graph is greater than the total for the two weeks in the table. Why is this feature important to you - This feature is important because when building out trended visualizations, we rely on having accurate information displayed. There are times that we need to trend the sum of a couple items from a dimension, and in some cases using a segment won't work because there is no sub-hit filtering (this is especially important when using product related dimensions). This limits our ability to create useful visualizations within workspace. How would you like the feature to work - When selecting the summary row (or any row), the associated line/area visualization should display the trended number from the selected row only. If only part of a dimension is in the table (either from a filter or dropping individual dimension items), the visualization should only include data from those items so that the graph matches what is in the freeform table. Current Behaviour - Currently when selecting the summary row, it is trending the entire dimension regardless of how many items are displayed in the table.
In order to prevent important smart campaigns from being turned off in the 6month cleanup there should be a setting on a smart campaign to prevent it being turned off and a setting on a program so that all smart campaigns nested under it will not get turned off
Why is this feature important to you?Tracking milestones is a critical component of project management within my organization. While the Milestones Dashboard is a great visual tool, its full potential is not being realized due to current limitations in how the data is presented and grouped. How would you like the feature to work?I’d like to see greater customization options within the Milestones Dashboard.Specifically: - Program-level grouping: Currently, the view only displays milestones at the project level. It would be extremely helpful to group and filter projects under specific programs to better manage larger initiatives. - Team visibility: Include the ability to view which team members are assigned to each milestone or associated task, to improve ownership visibility and resource planning.- Expanded milestone assignment: Enable multiple tasks to be assigned to a single task and make them visible in the dashboard view for better granularity. Many project milestones consist of multiple tasks. - A filter or sort function by milestone statusCurrent BehaviorThe current Dashboard Milestones view is a strong visual tool but lacks flexibility. It is limited to a rigid structure that only supports project-level display, without the ability to drill down into team-level or program-level details.
Description - Programs need to show the currency of the projects within that program Why is this feature important to you - We have multiple programs where all the projects within that program are in GBP, but when viewing aggregated data rolled up at the program level, it defaults to USD. This is time consuming and frustrating for users looking at a Dashboard in the left nav, they have to go to the View dropdown and the Change Currency dropdown within there to select their specific currency, the 'Project's Original Currency' shows all aggregated values in USD. If currency custom fields are used on a program, they also default to showing a US dollar symbol in front of the value How would you like the feature to work - Programs allow for a selection of currency and show all currency fields in the selected currency. Current Behaviour - When viewing custom currency fields on a program or when viewing Dashboards with aggregated values on a report that have been added to the left nav of a Program, they all default to USD.
We have received some feedback about how hard it is to track and manage comments in WF. We would love to add the ability to search/group project comments by task to make this feature easier to use and keep the team more organized.
Already have an account? Login
Enter your E-mail address. We'll send you an e-mail with instructions to reset your password.
