Build better products with our product team
Enhance Parameters by adding a new string field to the current list (ID, customerID, dataType, description, displaySize, displayType, extRefID, formatConstraint, isRequired, lastUpdateDate, lastUpdatedByID, and name). This could be used by administrators to record a note about each parameter.With the addition of one simple string field, admins would finally have a quick answer to questions like, Why did we add this? How is this different from similarly named parameters? Who needs approve changes to this?
Could there be a way to upload Analysis workspace schedule IDs and delete them in bulk, all in one go. With the current product design, from "Scheduled Projects Manager" we can select all the schedule IDs/scheduled workspace projects names that we want to delete and then hit the delete button. This task still remains manual, as the user would have to manually search the scheduled workspace projects and then click on the checkbox. In case of organizations having more than 1000 users, with ~1000 scheduled workspace projects it becomes slightly difficult to perform the manual search n delete. Hence, hoping if any capability (maybe APIs) could be provided in future to fulfill the requirement.
Our team uses document folders in Workfront, which house multiple document proofs. When one document proof is opened within a folder, then the proof is closed, the user is taken back to the folder instead of the list of documents within the folder. We want to be taken back to the list of documents within the folder. One less click.
Let me start by saying I appreciate the fact that the admins can add people to plan and work licenses with out going to their WF Rep, it keeps it very easy. However I would like to see a warning pop-up to notify the user that they are able to incur more costs. The idea would be when you add to a paid license role above the number of licenses already paid for, a pop-up would warn you saying something like:"A paid license is being added, please click yes if you would like to continue. Click No if you would like to cancel." The idea would not be to slow down the ability to add users, but just to warn you in case the budget doesn't allow for additional licenses. Is this something others would find useful?
our agency is moving towards MS Teams, transitioning away from Basecamp. I am setting up a client-shared collaborative team in MS Teams. I would like a way to include the unique reviewers' links or notifications of new workfront Proofs within the team channel. They lose track of emails and the historical/central aspect of including this in MS Teams would be huge! I'm afraid getting adoption of using workfront proof for reviews will be impossible without a way to add it into the team channel directly. thank you.
Currently, clearVars does not clear variable values of a context data variable.We are assigning some context data variables to send in a beacon. But we have multiple beacons fired on the same page, and we are seeing the same context data variables are being sent every time and not being cleared.I know, the recommended way would be to use ManageVars plugin to clean up the value of multiple variables including context data variables.However, it would be great to simplify the task and add context data variables in clearVars function too. To add on the above enhancement, I would like to clarify if there is any recommended and safe way to clear the context data without interfering with how Adobe Analytics uses context data for activity map.
Be able to set a default time for all task due.Currently when we create a task and set the due date the time is preset to the quarter hour for which the task in being created. Meaning, if I have a due date of 8/12 and created the task at 11:12 am the task would be due on 8/12 by 11:15 am. Understandably the user can adjust this time which we'd like to keep, but we'd also like the possibility to set a default time for all task to be completed by.
Currently, there is no way to control the sending of reports to an external email. While the capability exists when it comes to sharing a report with external emails, sending a report has no such restrictions. This is a potential security issue on an enterprise level where classified, confidential information should be kept internal to the firm.
When downloading an item in Workfront Project Management that has already been migrated over to the DAM the download should open in a new browser window instead of restricting it to open only in the existing window as it currently functions. Having to reopen Workfront Project Management due to this is not efficient.
In workspace, it is currently possible to interpret zero as no value. To build on this feature, I would also like the ability to not display rows that have no value. This would enable workspace users to display rows in a table that are relevant, while 'hiding' the others via the features to interpret zero as no value and display only rows with a value.
It would be great if we had the ability as a System Admin to control what a user can edit in their user profile. The major use case would be stopping a user from editing their email address to a personal one without permission. This would cause control issues. Namely, as a prelude to this, if SSO is set up, if should by default stop a user from changing their email as this should be tied to SSO.
When creating a project using a template with task assignments to job roles, if you are assigned as the project owner and also have your primary role assigned to the tasks within the project, when clicking "Save Changes" to create the project, it would be ideal if you could get a pop-up asking if your name should be selected to self-assign to fill that role for all tasks within the project containing that role assignment. Benefits:For projects that contain only tasks that will also be assigned to the owner, reducing the clerical duty to navigate to the Staffing tab.For projects that contain tasks with multiple job roles, this will save time self-selecting, especially when creating multiple projects on a daily basis.
When a user can't access a work object in Workfront, they're presented with a "Request Access" page, where they can select another user from whom they want to request access. This causes two pain points:There are certain reports, dashboards, projects, and requests that we don't want users requesting their own access - we only want these objects shared proactively, not reactively. Second, there are certain reports, dashboards, projects, and requests that we want shared only with job roles/teams/groups - not individuals. This ensures only qualified users have access, due to their role in the org. The only way that they should gain access to these objects is to have their profile updated to include the appropriate membership. But we can't enforce that, and users just end up requesting individual access which they retain even after they switch teams or job roles.What we want is the ability to specify a redirect URL on a per object basis that prevents the user from requesting access, and instead allows us to convey custom messaging to them.
We make extensive use of tags to keep track of what components should appear in which virtual report suite (VRS). When curating a VRS it would be a great time saver to be able to add/remove component tags from this screen in the same way you can else where in the tool (i.e. right click on the component):
Idea: Some type of customer facing "View History" tab or log in the Adobe Analytics Admin interface containing detailed Marketing Channel Processing Rule change history, similar to how the Processing Rules "View History" tab contains detailed historical changes/versions made to the processing rules.Benefits:Corporate data security requirements regarding detailed logs for any type of administrator access and changes."Why did <some marketing channel report> break/change?" and "Who did this and why was it done this way?" research by administrators. This is especially true for companies that have multiple Adobe Analytics administrators (or are new to the role), or have had these settings changed by contractors or consultants that are long gone.Simply put, if anyone other than you has ever changed a Marketing Channel Processing Rule, this idea is for you.Problem: The Admin Tools Log only contains basic entries like "Marketing Channel Rulesets was approved" and "Marketing Channel:Paid Search was approved" but nothing that indicates if a channel was enabled/disabled, if the "Override Last-Touch Channel" was enabled/disabled, or any other details like "Channel Breakdown" and "Channel Type" selections.Solution: Make the detailed Marketing Channel Processing Rule change history customer facing within the Adobe Analytics Admin interface.Apparently there is some type of searchable internal tool/log within Adobe which is not customer facing that contains detailed Marketing Channel Processing Rule changes. Here is an example of the data from that tool/log* (Note: This is how this info was formatted when sent to me in an RTF file from Adobe Customer Care.):Rule saved on Dec 23rd 19, 11:55 PST by Company / someone@company.com#1 : Set Paid Search to PageQSParam utm_medium If All: - PageQSParam StartsWith utm_medium ps #2 : Set Email to PageQSParam utm_medium If All: - PageQSParam StartsWith utm_medium em #3 : Set Trade Shows to PageQSParam utm_medium If All: - PageQSParam StartsWith utm_medium tsPlease implement this idea! 😀Thanks,-Phil
If I build an advanced search filter, and want to change the report structure/hierarchy, I need to redo these filters. Advanced filters are nice for on-the-fly analysis, but sometimes they prove their worth in keeping. Or just because you would like to take the search filter further in an analysis. Being able to save it as a segment and apply it to the panel would be an amazing time saving.
Communication needs to happen during active projects between Requesters and Workers for success of the project. In a current project (converted from issue queue), the ability to communicate in Updates is not available to requesters. Updates is not in the left navigation for Requesters when looking at an active project. I can't imagine Square is alone in needing the ability to communicate between Requesters and Workers throughout a project lifecycle. I have already run into an issue of a Worker asking a question in Updates to a Requester and the Requester getting the email notification of the question but UNABLE to answer it. Per customer service:Currently, in Workfront a requester can only have view rights to a project. So they would be unable to make comments because they do not have contribute access. They will have contribute access to the issue and would be able to make comments.
I created a CUSTOM form called LEAD GENERATION that has a series of quesions that must be answered prior to submitting a Marketing Request Form (MRF).The form works great. Only problem is when I convert the MRF into a PROJECT, we lose the form data at the project level. The MRF is linked to the project so when I go back in to check the MRF the dats is intact - just not making it over to the Project Custom Form Tab.Does anyone know why this is and how to fix it?I tried uploading files but the system says it cannot upload the. I tried PNG.
In the Reports and Documents areas, the ability to collapse the folder panel on the left side would be very helpful. This would allow more space for the "meat" of the reports list. I would love to see this become a toggle-setting similar to hiding the panel in a project's task list.
At the moment, if you change the name of a classification it breaks all the associated classification rules built in the classification rule builder. Each rule then has to be manually edited to get it working again with the new classification name. I think it would make sense if a classification name change automatically updated the classification rule builder.
Currently when someone with a Planner license adds a new user, they are able to add them with a Plan license that matches their Access Level. However, they cannot add a new User with a Plan license on a different Access Level. We even tried allowing them to be a User Admin for All Users and that didn't work. Obviously, they shouldn't be able to add someone as System Administrator, but is there any reason a Group Admin/User Admin shouldn't be able to add Plan licenses with different Access Levels than their own?My proposal is to allow an access level, like in this case, to allow a Group/User Admin to be able to add a lower level Plan license. Would love to have this functionality.
When I create a new user and click "Show Advanced Options" the default Access Level given to the new user is System Administrator. This seems unnecessarily dangerous, why wouldn't the default user role be the most restricted instead of the least?
We would find it incredibly useful and time saving to be able to move and copy actions between different rules in launch. I'd expect to access the feature by via a clicking with right mouse button on an action to reveal a menu with the options. Please can this be considered?
I think it would be helpful if there way a way to automatically enroll any new users in the new user experience, while still allowing to keep the option for existing users to remain in Workfront classic.Thank you
Currently we need to create mobile viewports manually in setup options.It'll be convenient if we get some mobile viewports added by default.
Already have an account? Login
Enter your E-mail address. We'll send you an e-mail with instructions to reset your password.
Sorry, we're still checking this file's contents to make sure it's safe to download. Please try again in a few minutes.
Sorry, our virus scanner detected that this file isn't safe to download.
