Build better products with our product team
Add the ability to get a Fusion Test Drive account. There is already the ability to request a Workfront Test Drive account, so this would go hand-in-hand with that.
Description -Why is this feature important to you - Request from users / teamsHow would you like the feature to work - A filter / view to see tasks assigned to a teamCurrent Behaviour - If the task is assigned to a "team" the people on the team do not see those tasks in Priorities / Calendar.The user (in the team) needs to click work on it first, then the task appears in Priorities / Calendar.
Description - - In Proof HQ, when creating Workflow templates it should allow us to add roles or teams that exist in Workfront.Why is this feature important - It reduces the need to maintain workflows in proof HQ and enhances the usage of proofing workflow templatesHow would you like the feature to work - When creating workflow templates in Proof HQ. While creating a stage and adding people to those stages, it should allow the user to not just select individual users but also allow them to select teams or roles from the respective Workfront instance.Current Behaviour - Proof HQ only allows the user to add individual users to stages when creating workflow templates in Proof HQ.
Objective of improvement:When two users share the same device and the Identity Graph Linking Rule is applied, let the anonymous browsing events associated with the same ECID be assigned to both profiles, rather than only the last one identified.Context:Applicant: The PL market, which seeks to implement specific use cases for SME.Example of use case:Offer leasing products or benefits by opening SME accounts to sme and/or individual profiles, if during anonymous browsing the user shows interest in SME products.Current situation:A user in Poland can have two profiles:Individual profile: customer_id=111, customer_type =ind (example).SME Profile: customer_id=222, customer_type=sme (example).Both profiles share the same ECID, as it is the same person using the same device.Current problem with Identity Graph Linking Rule:Public browsing events generated with the same ECID are assigned only to the last identified customer_id.This means that:If the public browsing event is the trigger, only the customer_id of the most recently logged in client will be impacted.Public browsing events are assigned exclusively to that customer_id at this point, which makes us lose the opportunity to contact the other profile.In order to impact both users, we need the ability to assign public browsing events to both profiles.
Description:We are encountering a limitation in the New Teams Workfront Application where the external lookup field is not visible. This field is essential for our workflows, and its absence is impacting our ability to manage requests effectively. Issue Summary:In the Teams Workfront App, the field does not appear at all.Troubleshooting steps already taken:Uninstalled and reinstalled the Workfront app in Microsoft Teams.Verified that the latest version of the New Teams client is in use (in use for over a year). Feature Request:We request you (Adobe Workfront) to:Enable full support for external lookup fields in the Teams Workfront Application.Provide clear documentation on any limitations or configuration requirements for using external lookup fields in Teams integrations. Business Impact:Incomplete request forms due to missing fields.Manual workarounds required, reducing efficiency.Increased risk of data inconsistency and user frustration. We believe this enhancement will significantly improve the usability and consistency of the Workfront experience within Microsoft Teams.
Description -A customer's marketing team is currently facing a significant limitation within the Campaign Web UI: they are unable to directly upload images and PDFs. The existing drag-and-drop template functionality (Email HTML editor (ACRITE app)) does not effectively meet their needs for managing these assets, leading to inefficiencies in their content setup processes. Why is this feature important to you -This feature is crucial because our customer's marketing team is currently unable to efficiently set up their content within the Campaign Web UI due to the lack of a direct upload mechanism for images and PDFs. The current limitations are hindering their ability to effectively use drag-and-drop templates and are impacting their productivity. How would you like the feature to work -We envision a dedicated "Upload" tab or a clearly accessible interface within the Campaign Web UI that allows users to browse and directly upload image and PDF files. This would streamline the process of incorporating assets into their campaigns, eliminating current workarounds. Current Behaviour -Currently, users are unable to directly upload images and PDFs via the Campaign Web UI. The existing methods, particularly concerning the setup of drag-and-drop templates, do not provide an effective solution for managing these types of assets.
Description - Have the ability to iterate (list method) in calculated fields, the same way it can be done in reports using text mode.Why is this feature important to you - This feature would be valuable as it enables users to reference Workfront objects that are directly related to the one they’re currently working on. It ultimately enhances efficiency and clarity when managing interconnected Workfront objects. How would you like the feature to work - the same it is currently working on reports. Current Behaviour - Is not feasible
When using the 'updates' function or tab, it would be useful for our teams to be able to utilize this space in a fashion similar to email. IE- to add colored text to responses, in order to differentiate between users. Also, it would be helpful to allow certain updates to be 'pinned' to the top of the page so they don't get lost. OR to categorize them as "bulletins or job notes" of some kind to set them apart from the back and forth threads.
Description - Would love to be able to see user active statuses within Workfront to see who is active in WF, away or offline similar to Teams chat.Why is this feature important to you - This will allow us to see who we may need to follow up with outside of Workfront and/or escalate to another person on their team/manager.How would you like the feature to work - Colored circular icon next to each users name as it appears throughout the system - login, project owner, updates, task assignments, etc.Current Behaviour - N/A
When a project is being assigned sometimes there are multiple team members for one specific role working on it, workload balancer only lets you assign to one role and the rest is manual work, it would be a game changer if this minor edit is made
Description - In the current single advanced proofing workflow, once a user is added to a stage, they can no longer be included in a later stage of the approval process. This creates the need to manually issue a second workflow if an individual user acts an an initial and a final approver. Some smaller teams I have worked with rely on one or two people to both do initial approvals and feedback while then also being the "final" approver, once all team member have given then comments and approvals.Why is this feature important to you -The need to manually create a new workflow for a "final" approval creates drag in the SLA's of certain proofing Workflows, or requires Fusion to act as a intelligent trigger to make the new workflow. For small marketing teams, Fusion is usually cost prohibitive.How would you like the feature to work - I would like an individual user to be able to be applied to each stage in an advanced proofing workflow. This will allow small teams in which managers act as both initial reviewer/approvers as well as a final last-mile approver to the overall workflow.Current Behaviour - Right now, once a user is entered as an user on any stage, they no longer appear in a user picklist when creating additional stages.
Description -Ability to filter DataFlow based on Target dataSet is missing in the AEP UI Why is this feature important to you -When there are 10s of more dataFlow going into a perticular dataSet, we only have an option to filter by source Application. Many times we want to see how many dataFlow are going into single dataSet. How would you like the feature to work -We want ability to filter dataFlow by target DataSet Current Behaviour -We can only filter dataFlow by source Application
Description - The process of planning an iteration on the Backlog tab of the New Experience is not intuitive and causes a lot of problems when trying to respect a teams capacity when planning an iteration. Why is this feature important to you - Users must be able to easily see if stories selected exceed the total iteration capacity during the planning of an iteration in order to respect the teams capacity. This will also make it much easier for user to properly plan iterations without having to go back and forth through pages in Workfront. How would you like the feature to work - When a user wishes to plan/create a new iteration from the Backlog tab, the user can click on the "Plan Iteration" button and a new section appears above the list of stories. The user can enter the necessary iteration information (name, start date, end date, focus, capacity, and goal). The user can also see in the same section the total capacity available for the iteration (capacity x focus). The user can then go through the list of stories and check/uncheck work. If the user selects stories that exceed the total available capacity for the iteration, the stories that exceed are highlighted in red in the backlog. Bring back the previous Workfront behavior as shown in the video on the following Experience League page - Plan and create an iteration | Adobe Workfront. Current Behaviour - When a user wishes to plan/create a new iteration from the Backlog tab, the user must first select work items, then click the "Plan Iteration" button. The "Plan Iteration" dialog box appears where the user can see if they have selected too many/little stories for the iteration (based on team capacity = total points). If the user has selected too many/little stories for the iteration, they must close the "Plan Iteration" dialog box in order to deselect/select stories.
issue: The system shall provide functionality to sort project updates by date, displaying the latest updates at the top. This feature will be another option to the current grouping by topic/conversation, which hinders the ability to quickly locate recent comments. The new sorting mechanism will ensure that users can easily find the most recent updates within the project interface.justification: The current method of grouping updates by topic/conversation makes it difficult to track the latest comments, leading to an over-reliance on emails for status updates. Implementing date-based sorting will streamline the process of finding recent updates, thereby improving efficiency and reducing dependency on external communication channels.What is Not an acceptable Enhancement:Only sorting updates by topic/conversation via the search bar, without the option to sort by date and date range.
Description - From one of my users, can we get the ability to delete a proof version in the "All Versions" page of a proof document? It makes more sense than having it only in the proof summary area, where you need to go through multiple clicks to get where you want. Why is this feature important to you - more efficient way to delete versions How would you like the feature to work - noted above, delete from the All versions location (picture 1)Current Behaviour - noted above, it shows in the proof summary location for version deletion (picture 2)
Previously, the template name was included with the Template Task ID selection for reporting. This allowed us to select the appropriate template task when we had multiple template tasks with the same name. We are aware of the workaround of using the Task Name and Template ID filters together; however, this is not ideal as our PMs sometimes change the task name after a project is created.
Design Studio is clunky and outdated in my opinion. Images and files are incredibly difficult to reorganize because I am unable to move more than on item at a time. Get an error message every time.Would love for a more seamless experience when navigating or making adjustments to existing folders.
Description - Allow Workfront administrators to activate/deactivate the "Show all users" button in the Workload Balancer at the project level.Why is this feature important to you - This will ensure the proper management of confidential information (user capacity) throughout the organisation.This will allow the Project Owner to only see the capacity of resources working on the project without How would you like the feature to work - Give Administrators the ability to deactivate the "Show all users" button in the Workload Balancer at the project level restricting the users' ability to the capacity of all the users within their company.Current Behaviour - Users' can view and click the "Show all users" button, allowing them to view the capacity of all the users within their company.
Description:Our organization manages user permissions centrally through groups in Azure Active Directory (Azure AD). These groups are synchronized with Adobe Experience Cloud, allowing us to efficiently allocate product and profile permissions based on group membership. However, currently, administrative roles such as Product Administrator, Profile Administrator, Support Administrator, and System Administrator can only be assigned to individual users, not to groups. This creates a challenge for organizations that rely on group-based permission management and automation.Why is this feature important to you:Managing permissions at the group level ensures consistency, security, and scalability, especially in large organizations. Assigning admin roles to groups means that when a user is added to or removed from a group in Azure AD, their corresponding admin permissions in Adobe are automatically updated. This reduces manual intervention, minimizes human error, and helps maintain compliance with internal access management policies. Without this capability, we are forced to manually update admin roles for each user, which is inefficient and error-prone.How would you like the feature to work:We would like to be able to assign all administrative roles (Product Admin, Profile Admin, Support Admin, System Admin, etc.) to groups, not just individuals, within the Adobe Admin Console. When a user is added to or removed from a group in Azure AD, and that group is synced with Adobe, the user should automatically inherit or lose the corresponding admin rights based on their group membership. This approach should mirror how product/profile permissions are currently managed via groups.Current Behaviour:At present, administrative roles in Adobe Experience Cloud can only be assigned directly to individual users. Group-based assignment of these roles is not supported, which complicates permission management for organizations using directory group synchronization.
Description - there is a capability to add a column or status to the Kanban boards. We need that same capability to add columns to the Board view of a project/tasks since Adobe is moving away from Kanaban boards exisiting in Workfront.Why is this feature important to you - Kanban boards are allegedly not going to exist in Workfornt in the near future so the same functionalities the Kanban boards offer would be helpful to also have in the Boards view in a project.How would you like the feature to work - Quickly add a column and equate it to a status with custom text/headingsCurrent Behaviour - Doesn't exist. Feature exists only on Kanban boards under Teams, not within Boards under projects that we were instructed to begin using from here on out.
Does your organization run programs with multiple projects? Are your project managers responsible for managing large volumes of projects at the same time? Are you looking for an efficiency win? I think most organization will say yes and could really benefit from this idea. Idea: Implement the ability to quickly and easily assign users to roles at not only the project level, but also on the program level which would then cascade to all associated projects. Add a Workload Balancer at the Program level with ability to do Bulk Assignments relative to the cumulative roles identified in the associated projects. How could this work? Expose the Workload Balancer on a Program which would allow ability to assign/override any user on any given project for a selected role. If a Project Manager assigned a user at the Project Level, this would then subsequently override the Program Level assignment; there could even be an indicator carried up to the program level that indicates multiple users or the values as well for a quick display if desired. Current Experience Challenge: Project Managers must either manually assign users task by task, or potentially through bulk edit through sifting throught tasks, or by going to the Workload Balancer for every project. We commonly are running 10-15 projects or more and this requires a very significant amount of time every week to simply assign the same user.
We use the Workfront proofing tool to proof web pages that are created in AEM Sites. Ideally, we would use the URL function within the Workfront proofing tool, to generate the preview of the site and allow the reviewer to review and markup the proof. However, since only designers have AEM Sites access, the reviewer isn't able to view the proof when added as a URL to the proofing tool.Alternatively, the designer is uploading a pdf version of the web page as a document, to the proofing tool. But because it is not a text-based document, the reviewer does not have necessary proofing tools to mark-up text.Is there a way to leverage the URL function of the proofing tool, when reviewing AEM Sites pages prior to the page being published, even though reviewers don't have AEM Sites access? Or can the proofing tool identify text on these pdf versions of web pages (which would enable the text editing proofing options).
Right now i don't see any documentation on how you can create your own custom workflow activity. So people are going in and writing java script code to have that functionality implemented.It will be great to have some kind of documentation to follow on how to create the custom activity the right way and what should be the best practices to create any activity.
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: Multiple domain support for Manage Publication Preview Use-case: My customer APG would like to be able to preview the website in AEM that contains links to multiple domains. The Publication Preview functionality is not following the externalizer configuration to be used properly (screenshot of externalizer domains used below). Current/Experienced Behavior: It is possible to set multiple domains in the externalizer configuration, but only 1 domain is respected in the Publication Preview functionality, resulting in errors in the links when previewing the website (see 'part 2' screenshot below). The impact of multiple domains not being support in the Publication Preview functionality is that it is impossible for APG to properly preview their websites and use this feature properly to identify potential issues. Improved/Expected Behavior: An out of the box solution to support multiple domains for links in the Publication Preview would enable APG to preview their websites properly in AEM. Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): AEMaaCS feature release 2025.2.0, maintenance release 19823 Customer-name/Organization name: APG Groep N.V. Screenshot (if applicable): Code package (if applicable):
Description - Seed addresses used for internal testing in campaign) are currently included in Adobe analytics reports by default. It can skew engagement metrics.Why is this feature important to you - including seed data inflates KPIs and provides misleading view of actual engagement. Accurate reporting is critical for evaluating true campaign performance, optimizing segmentation and driving meaningful decisions.How would you like the feature to work - Automatically filtering them out from AA reports or giving an option to exclude seed addresses.Current Behaviour - Currently seed addresses are treated like real customers and no out-of-the-box method to filter them out which leads to inaccurate campaign campaign evaluation.
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.
