Currently we are very limited in Notification options. Whilst there are the essential notifications for workers and reviewers available, planners such as project managers are missing a lot of important notifications (e.g. about their projects). They need to use multiple channels for notifications and can not rely on the Slack integration.We would like to have the option for all our users to rely on Slack notifications, without the need of email notifications in addition. Currently I think about a solution such as adding all notification options to Slack, or a solution where we are able to decide which notifications to receive where, without the need to go through each channel and deactivate/activate every option individually.
Create a work item directly from Slack conversation (three-dots-menu next to the message). The conversation then is added to the newly created item as update or description. This would work best in combination with the creation of work items from within a pop-up, as described here: Slack Integration: Creation of Objects from within a pop-up, rather than step-by-step + additional fields
With hundreds or thousands of custom fields created within Workfront, management of them becomes important to ensure data integrity and consistent capture of business information. Regular reviews to see what is being collected, where and how it's being used by the business are an important part of this process. While it's possible to get a rudimentary look at the views/groupings etc that utilize each field via text-mode, it is ugly at best and difficult to work with non-admin users on understanding without substantial rework of the output.i'd love to see some form of reporting that allows an admin a plain-text view to what reports/views etc are using each field so the impact of any changes can be easily understood.Katherine
It would be very helpful if users with "manage it" access to projects could also have the same response options on a commit date that a project owner has. Our PM dept has teams of a PM and APM and although only one of them can be set as owner, the other has manage it access. They need to be able to comment/accept commit dates, same as project owner.
We'd like the ability to batch update commit dates either from within the project plan itself or reporting. It is understood that the assignee is the only user able to update a commit date, but that could be built into the batch update. We have thousands of tasks assigned to vendor colleagues who have accounts within our instance, and they need the ability to batch update commit dates.
Would like a setting at the project level that would allow the Project manager to let anyone update the commit date or set it so that only the Task owner can update the commit date.
Current System shows "on time" status when commit date is later than planned completion date. It should show "Behind" since the task owner can't make the planned completion date (lack of resource/time/supplier late etc etc) If PM does not resolve it, project won't be "on time" so system should forecast the correct status. Until PM can work with task owner or change task owner to pull ahead the date (changing the commit date) or accept the commit date, it should not show "on time" as status. This caused major confusion to our organization and our PMs' ability to properly forecast late project or late task
If a commit date is set, then there is an issue upstream in the project, you cannot clear out the commit date. The planned date is changeable but then you have to manually open each task and change it to a new commit date (not just delete). The issue is that I may not WANT to set a commit date yet because we are still waiting on feedback from a client. I want to clear/delete commit date until I have further information. This causes great confusion for team members as the Planned Date may have changed but the Commit Date still shows an old date. This is also an issue if you copy a project to a new project where the old one had commit dates. Now you have to in an manually change those old commit dates one by one to something that may not even be valid.
Current System design to automatically put an commit date into a task if task owner click working on it or put the task in "in Progress". This works for request type of company that people take the tasks if they can commit to the date. However, this caused a lot of status issue per our company and we have to customize a lot of different status or custom form which never quite ideal. In manufacturing company, PM provide the schedule with resource assigned to the tasks by their supervisor so it is not true that if task owner put the task in progress, he is to commit to finish on time. It is just simply means that he is working on it and it is XX percent completed. It is not practical for him to type in different date to the system since he may not know where to commit yet (issue with customer/design issues etc) He can simply update percent complete and system can figure the date out based on his update. This is easier approach for us. Current this "automatic" system commit date caused a lot of issue for us. The marked several "late" project to "on time" but this is not true. We should have an option to op out of "automatically system commit date" so we can use the system base on progress nor manually commit a date. Provide us more flexibility options on commit dates so it can be more suitable for different organizations will improve the system so each organization can set this up per their need instead of constant struggle with commit date and wrong status indication If a system can't forecast properly the project status, it is really useless to a organization
In My Work, change the view for "Assigned To" view "This Will Be Done By" date to be configured to display planned completion date instead of commit date. Our teams do not use commit date so the This will be Done By is not useful and gets flagged as incorrect repeatedly by our users.
In My Work, a user can update their commit date without having to click through to the task. This makes it easy for the team. In Home, you can add the Commit Date field to the Home Template, but doing so doesn't allow you to edit the Commit Date from the page. It would be great if this could be an editable field like it currently is in My Work.
Often our team members will propose new dates for tasks that may not work in the overall time line. The PMs negotiate with the user, and a fair portion of the time we find a way to keep the original planned completion date. The only way to remove / delete the commit date is to unassign then reassign the resource. It does not take long, but is cumbersome. Adding the option to "reject" the request in-line next the "Change Planned Date to...." link, would be helpful.
Currently when commit dates change on a task it sends an approval to the Project Owner. This approval doesn't follow the approval workflow used everywhere else in workfront it's a click button in the task instead of in the My Work -> Approvals sectionI don't understand why the approvals are not listed on this approvals area in My Work like all other approvals are.
Would be great to define a few hot buttons in the upper project windows with which several predefined timelines can be opened quickly. Setup instruction:In the metadata fields is a row "hotbutton" where predefined numbers are available in a dropdown menu. E.g. for 5 hotbuttons in total available in the dropdown you find the numbers 1 or 2 or 3 or 4 or 5. The corresponding hot-buttons are always visible in the project window in the upper space maybe right from the search field icon. If I now define a two timelines to be connected to hot-button 1 and 8 timelines to be connected with hot-button 2 I can easily recall these timelines at once without searching. At a very big project with several edit-version this would help me a lot. Recall instruction: No matter how many timelines are open at the moment. When pushing hot-button 1 those previously predefined two timelines open. And when pushing hot-button 2 these two timelines get closed and the 8 timelines of hot-button 2 open. When deactivating all hot-buttons the initial state of timelines appear again.
It would be helpful if there could be a system preference to allow project names to be alphabetized regardless if the first letter of the first word is capitalized or not. Some of our project names don't start with a capital letter, and that pushes the project name to the bottom of any list. While I understand this sorting, it would be nice if companies had the ability to turn this sorting on or off.
Thinking of how Salesforce has set up Workflow Rules functionality:The ability to create a workflow rule against any standard object or custom formThe ability, within a workflow rule, to define qualification criteria using point and click declarative logic, or creating custom formulasThe ability, within a workflow rule, to set up custom automated actions such as: email alerts/notifications; update field or object data; create a new project, task, issue, or hour entryThe ability to make workflow actions time dependent (e.g. trigger action x hours after record meets rule criteria)The ability, within a workflow rule, to evaluate the rule when a record is:CreatedCreated, and every time it's editedCreated, and any time it's edited to subsequently meet criteria
Looking for a way to add preconfigured tasks without having to "store" them in a separate template. For example, it would be nice to be able to select pre-set tasks from a drop-down list with the Add New Task functionality.
I love the functionality to be able to call out certain text by using Bold, Italics and Underline features that exist in the new Rich Text Fields. This makes is so much easier to create a space that leads the eye around the page and allows users to focus on what's important. But what about Bullets? And perhaps even the ability to indent text? This could be a total game changer in output and user experience, especially since a lot of the users are marketing folks. They exist in a world that is driven by visual queues.
There are some good use cases for needing to query records that start with apostrophes: for example, a common list upload error that can occur involves improperly-formatted CSV files, resulting in records with email addresses like 'example@hotmail.com' instead of example@hotmail.com. Currently, the Marketo platform doesn't properly return results for these queries because the character is improperly escaped. If you do a search for "Email Address: begins with ' ", you will return all non-empty email addresses. Attempting to use common SQL escape patterns (\', '') does not fix the problem. If this behavior could be fixed so the search correctly looks for apostrophes, it would be appreciated. (I am aware there are other ways to retrieve this data and have done so; I just wanted to note this specific bug.)
As it stands right now a Group Admin (even with User editing turned on in access level) cannot edit a User's email address or federation ID. They can change everything else with that user but not those two things. So if there is a change in email or federation ID the group admin has to contact a System Admin to make this change which can cause serious delays.
I love the feature to allow the Group Administrator designation; however, it would be nice to be able to add group administration at the sub-group level, as well. Because of the structure, you may have the top-level with a very senior person who wouldn't at all be appropriate to take that role. That leaves you with a person in one of the lower groups who would then administrate for all of those groups. That would give visibility that would be at too great a level. Case in point: We have an HR Group, with three sub-groups. Those three sub-groups have various responsibilities which need to be segregated for employee protection. There is a related issue, that needs to be addressed. Currently, when adding the group administrator at the highest level (which is the only option), it still doesn't automatically give them visibility into all of the work for the sub-groups. They have to be added manually. I currently have that listed as a product error, Request # 1137107.
Hello,our client would like to have the ability to edit a page with enabled Live Copy Status view. This was possible with AEM 6.1.There are use cases where this is helpful, especially if there are a lot of components on a page and an editor needs to find and update the one with the broken inheritance.Can this be added to AEM?Thanks & Many regardsHendrik
We want to work with more than one agile team on the same backlog for a complex product/market/solution as described in the Scrum Guide. That is necessary to keep the teams small but have all requirements in a single product backlog. Therefore we need to be able to assign more than one agile team to an task/EPIC/Story/etc. Today we can assign only one single team to a story which means it isn't visible to the other teams anymore.
Virtual Report Suites are compatible with Data Warehouse but bizarrely not the Data Warehouse API.This oddity is causing us significant issues as things that can be manually produced from Data Warehouse cannot be automated via the API.(or if we do want to automate we have to open up the real report suites to our users, resulting in a loss of administrative control making our adoption of virtual report suites pointless) It's also causing us similar issues with our Decibel Insight integration.I don't understand why the API has been restricted in this way as Data Warehouse clearly has the capability to handle Virtual Report Suites?(I actually thought it was a defect but was informed by Client Care that this was as designed)Please can you consider enabling access to Virtual Report Suites via the Data Warehouse API?.... pretty please
We would like to use the dashboards for a more custom home view setup for our user, so that when they login they see all that they need in one place. It would be great to be able to add internal page sections to the dashboard without having to add it as an external link within an iFrame.For instance, we want to add a custom form for a new request to a dashboard. We tried this by adding it as an external page, but we found that the iFrame will refresh to the home page after the request is submitted, displaying the page within a page and confusing the user. Hoping this is something that has been considered for future development!
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.
