It would be great if we could hide the bottom +Add More Issues so users only have access to the top New Issue button. We don't want people o assign other users issues/tasks and we get more info for the top issue button.
The business case automatically picks up any custom form already attached to a project, which is then automatically added to the exported business case (pdf). We have custom forms attached to all project templates, but the information contained in these forms shouldn’t necessarily be included in a business case. Whilst I have seen there’s an option to remove a custom form in the business case view, this though removes the custom form from the project, along with any data already present, which isn’t great. We have a unique custom form created for the business case fields we need that aren’t already part of the standard Workfront build, but we would need the ability to remove any other custom form from being included in the business case export, but without removing it from the project entirely and the data already present. Without this functionality we will have to resort back to a Word based business case template, which would need to be attached to each project in Workfront, which isn’t ideal considering the good functionality and options already present in Workfront. We would also like the exported business case to include our company branding, and if possible, editable, so an option other than export to .pdf would be great.
Currently no way to print a custom form in a meeting-friendly format. Screenshot and print is the only workaround, but that doesn't have a polished look.‚
DescriptionToday I received multiple reports from people in my organization complaining that they didn't get their weekly reports mailed to them. It seems that there was an issue listed in the status system which likely caused the issue. Now, at this point you are thinking this is more of a complaint about the failure... it's not.... what comes next relates directly to improvements that would make all our lives easier. When I checked my Scheduled Projects area... I noticed a few things...there is nothing in my "failed" filter (I assume this is because this relates to flat out failures, not temporary failures?)There is no way to see the "last sent" date/timeThere is no way to tell if the reports are delayed (and will send once the queue catches up) or or today's report failed completelyThere is no way to re-send reports from this interface (an no link to the reports) - so if I need to resend 30 reports, I have to go and find them all individually and send them one at a time To Improve this tool significantly, there should be a way to:Have a column showing the last date/time the report was sent successfully (this will help identify which reports failed)Have a column showing the next data/time the report should be sent (this will help identify IF the report is just delayed, or outright failied)Allow us to select multiple reports using the checkbox selectors, and have an option at the top (along with tag, delete, approve and export to csv) to "resend selected" (this will allow us to bulk resend failed reports easierProvide a way to link directly to the report (for editing), this could possibly show up in the popup window where you can edit the schedule.. but it would improve our ability to find specific reports easier when starting from the scheduler) (on that note, it would also be nice to see links to all the existing schedules/ability to edit your own schedule from the Workspace interface - I still have users who create multiple schedules, but don't have access rights to the Scheduled Reports area, so I have to clean it up for them - not realizing they created multiple schedules) Why is this feature important to youIt will provide much needed optimization to working with scheduled reports.. More visibility into items that failed / were delayed.. better functionality to resend failed items, and better cross functionality between building/editing reports and editing schedules. How would you like the feature to workSome features would be pure data, showing in the columns of the Scheduled Project interface... they don't even have to be turned on by default... they can be hidden unless shown by using the Config Columns. Some would be a new functionality to force report re-sends (for one or more items - an important bulk management feature) The last would be improvements on interlinking the Workspace Interface with the Scheduler interface, this would be the hardest to achieve, but would improve visibility, usability and workflows significantly. Current BehaviourTechnically these would all add on to existing behaviour, and that wouldn't change... these are all net new features.
When you enter a job role, Workfront will populate people that have that primary job role. Our Marketing team wears many hats, but WF will only populate their primary role, so if they enter "Web Admin", only people with that as their primary will show in the suggestions. There should be a way for any role assigned to a user would populate that users name when the job role is assigned to a task. Ex - Andrea's main job role is as the Assistant Marketing Director. She will be the designer of an ad that will go out in a few weeks, but if she selects "Design" as the job role, her name does not populate because it is listed under her "other roles", not her "primary role".
The new font that was pushed out to WF production 'to better align Adobe products and to improve consistency throughout the WF application' is difficult to read. The i's look like l's and the 5 look like S just to name a few of the issues our teams are complaining about.
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: In AEM we have an out-of-box capability to have AEM OSGI Events sent to Adobe IO: https://developer.adobe.com/events/docs/guides/using/aem/ https://github.com/adobe/aio-lib-java/tree/main/aem/aio_aem_events/src/cs/content/jcr_root/apps/aio-aem-events/osgiconfig/config.author One of these OSGI events is for the Page Publish event in which we can have an external webhook notified when this event in AEM occurs. Additionally we have the Managed Publication feature which allows for content authors to publish a page to a "Destination" such as the Publisher environment or a Preview environment. In my use case I have an external webhook configured to receive Page Publish event. In my test I used the Managed Publication feature to publish the same page first with the "Publish" destination and then again with the "Preview" destination. In both cases my external webhook is receiving the event properly, however the Adobe IO event payload between these two are identical and there is no way to distinguish which environment the page was being published to. I'm proposing that an additional attribute be added to the Adobe IO event body for the Page Publish event which would identify which "Destination" was selected if a content author uses the Managed Publication feature in AEM. The value could perhaps be the value "publish" or "preview" depending on what the author selected, or maybe even the fully qualified URL of the publisher or preview environment in the event body. Based on this attribute in the Adobe IO event payload my external webhook URL I would be able to add additional business logic to treat these two publish events differently based on the "Destination" that was used. Use-case: By having an additional attribute in the Adobe IO event payload we could have an external webhook have additional business logic to handle the "Publish" and "Preview" destination differently. In my case I have content that I am hosting on AWS and would like to know if an author as published a page to the publish environment or the preview environment to separate them. Current/Experienced Behavior: Currently the Adobe IO AEM page publish event payload sent to the webhook is identical between publishing to publish and preview environments and no way to distinguish the two. Improved/Expected Behavior: By having an additional attribute in the Adobe IO event payload that an author had selected using the Managed Publication feature in AEM my webhook would be able to treat the two page publish events differently by knowing the page to the publisher or preview environment. Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): AEM Cloud Service / Adobe IO Customer-name/Organization name: Coca-Cola Screenshot (if applicable): Code package (if applicable):
Our digital marketing team has expressed interest in being able to add Programs/Campaigns to Workfront calendars. Even being able to see the overall duration of the Program/Campaign on a calendar would be really helpful for leadership who aren't always involved with project/task level timelines.
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: Be able to preview Office assets on AEM. Currently, we only get to see the first page of PPTX and DOCX files Use-case: Be able to page through PPTX and DOCX files uploaded Current/Experienced Behavior: Currently, we only get to see the first page of PPTX and DOCX files Improved/Expected Behavior: Have the ability to page through Office Assets Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): AEMaCS Customer-name/Organization name: Screenshot (if applicable): Code package (if applicable):
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: Add a feature that will allow users to comment on assets like product reviews. The commenting on the timeline view is not intuitive since it seems more appropriate to be used for asset revision or updates Use-case: Be able to "product review" or comment on assets Current/Experienced Behavior: No dedicated area for "product reviewing" assets Improved/Expected Behavior: A dedicated tab or area for commenting on assets Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): AEMaCS Customer-name/Organization name: Screenshot (if applicable): Code package (if applicable):
Release Notes: January 2022 Form Validation Rules: Maintain the health of your database with the ability to block problematic or undesirable email domains from submitting Marketo Engage forms. The Global Form Validation Rule panel allows administrators to define a blocklist or enable a pre-defined list of free consumer domains to block from forms. ============================================ Improvement 1 - Validation rule assignmentAssign specific rule(s) to a single form. Applying rules for all forms is not always wanted. E.g. some forms should be able to receive email from gmail.com, some don't. Improvement 2 - Rule type There should be possibility to have an "include" option as a Rule type. E.g. I only want persons from domain "customers.com" to fill in the form. Now you can only do this if you would exclude all the domains in the world (which is not possible - see next improvement). Improvement 3 - Rules Have the ability to upload a csv and connect it to a rule (like the free email provider list) > we would like to have a similar solution for 5000+ domains related to Disposable Email Domains. Now the rule field can only 2000 characters.
Description - Allow the ability to create a CRS from 2 report suites.Why is this feature important to you - To be able to collate selective data from multiple report suites. We have 3 master report suites that house 150+ sites, having a single RSID for all is not possible.How would you like the feature to work - In the VRS creation RSID, it should show RSIDs that have the identical setup (same evar, props, events, etc. enabled and naming)Current Behaviour - You can only create a VRS based off 1 RSID. PS - Roll-ups are not helpful to me.
The new timesheet interface is more flexible in some ways, but in others it makes viewing a particular team members timesheet so much more difficult. Our company has been using Workfront for time tracking for years, so there are tens of thousands of timesheets available when I filter for 'all'. If i then try to search for a specific user with the quick filter, all of their timesheets will be spread out across different pages, depending on the sorting order (this also relates to another idea i submitted for quick filtering across multiple pages). In the old interface, it was so easy to just be able to search for a particular user or team and see all timesheets in one page.
Considering the move from Object-C to Swift, it is vital to prioritize the support for tvOS tvOS support on AEPCore, AEPIdentity, AEPLifecycle, AEPEdge and AEPAssurance https://aep-sdks.gitbook.io/docs/resources/upgrading-to-aep/current-sdk-versions#ios-swift
As an admin, I want to limit my program managers campaign restrictions based on their role or across an entire workspace. With some folks responsible for larger markets and others for smaller markets, It would be great to be able to align smart campaign limits with actual market size vs an arbitrary global value. This would be quite useful for all instances with workspaces broken out by geography or other segment giving admins the ability to be more strategic when placing campaign limitations. It would also enable admins to better protect communication limits based on actual send demographics and avoid the dreaded "Any/Or Not Filter" which typically results in an unintended full DB blast... and pain in everyone's backside ;). Part 1a : Enabling the Connection Between Roles and Limits: Update Admin, specifically Role Permissions Admin > Users > Roles > Permissions/Permission Sets [ ] Has Smart Campaign Processing Restriction Note: This defaults to 100,000 or what ever is entered as default in ADMIN > Smart Campaign > Smart Campaign Restrictions Part 1b : Enabling the Connection Between Workspaces and Limits: Update workspaces, specifically enabling connection to Campaign Limits. Admin > Workspaces > add Boolean option to enable campaign restriction... [ ] Has Smart Campaign Processing Restriction Note: This defaults to 100,000 or what ever is entered as default in ADMIN > Smart Campaign > Smart Campaign Restrictions Part 2: Managing Limits That value should be managed in the Smart Campaign Request Limits in Marketo. With roles or workspaces enabled. There the admin has the option to identify if these settings should be limited by workspace or by role, then be presented teh ability to select a role or workspace depending on option a or b then define the limit. Here is a crude PPTX mockup of what I was thinking 😄
It would be nice if there was some training available that is specific to group admins. Right now the option is to take the System Admin training but not all options apply to them within the system admin training. Their views and ability to access different items is different than where a system admin would go to access. It's incredibly confusing and there is little cohesive documentation around group admins in Workfront.
When someone submits a request and sets another user as the Primary Contact the submitter has no ability to see the request within Workfront easily. This should be visible on the submitted list, and they should receive the same notifications as the primary contact. Too often someone will submit a request and then question if it went through because they cannot easily find a trace of it.
We advise reviewers within the same stage that they must communicate and decide amongst themselves who will be the Decision-maker, as it will then lock the stage and lock the other reviewer out when they do. The problem is, they have no way of knowing if their stage is set to "Only one decision required" or not. So they have no idea if they need to have that conversation or not. The goal is that the onus will be on the reviewer/approvers to decide who will make the Decision for their department.
As part of our document approval process we have custom forms that key stakeholders must complete for sign off purposes. We need to get copies of these forms for our job bags, At the moment the export to pdf function is available for projects etc but not for within the documents section which means were having to take lost of screen shots of all the information we need. Can you please add in the export to pdf function for the documents section too?
We are pushing data from Marketo into a redshift database however the updates get pushed every 6 hours and is looking at the updated at field in Marketo. This field does not get updated when a custom field is updated only when a standard field is. We are now having to turn off the Marketo integration to push SFDC data to redshift which is more up-to-date.
Please alphabetize the outputs list for easier use.
If you create a report in a folder underneath a program, e.g. an Email Performance Report in a folder named "Reports", that report filters by default on all emails in that folder. But usually there are no emails in the folder "Reports", so the report comes back empty. I know that a lot of Marketo users organize themselves this way, so it would be much better if the filter on that report would default to the program and not to the folder underneath it. This behaviour came with the UI refresh after Sky.
In an ideal scenario, all objects that can be created by a user where they're "owned" by that user should be able to be reassigned.Some of the objects that come to mind are: Lists, Views, Groupings, Reports, Dashboards, Custom Forms, and Custom Form Fields.We've found that this has become an issue with some of our Administrators moving into different roles, where they won't necessarily require access to these objects anymore.This is even more important when these objects are shared with a large number of users, so it does not make sense to simply delete and re-create - as it would cause an enormous amount of work for administrator within Workfront.It's also a bit disappointing that others who have raised this idea, have simply had their ideas archived or dismissed without a response from Workfront or the relevant product owner.examples:https://one.workfront.com/s/idea/0870z000000PSDdAAO/detailhttps://one.workfront.com/s/idea/0870z000000PSsiAAG/detail
We often size our email sends but by Thursday we may say we're sending to 100 people, but it really goes to 80 because people hit comms limits. Yes, we should target smaller groups so that we're not hitting comms limits, but that's not realistic for us at this time. Instead, it would be helpful to have a field in Marketo where it shows if they hit communications limits or not or maybe the 'counter' behind the limit so I can write logic that says "if comms counter is at 2 emails, exclude". I realize I could build something in marketo, but having a smart campaign that runs every day making these updates or even a trigger is a massive issue in a DB in the millions. Having it on the backend that marketo creates would be ideal.
Although you can export an individual's lead activity log, there is currently no means of exporting ALL of the data associated with our scoring model. Yes, I guess it would depend on the standardization of folder names and folder structures underneath a 'Scoring' top-level folder however be awesome to see something along the lines of a mind-mapped export of your scoring model so that it could be shared amongst the more visual-oriented members of the team.
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.
