Build better products with our product team
I would like an "abort email program if number of qualified leads exceeds this limit" feature in the admin, similar to the limit for smart campaigns, to prevent users from accidently mailing to the entire database.
Right now only lead campaign limit overrides are allowed in actual smart campaigns, the same setting should be available on the settings tab of an email program where that campaign is built in.
Description - enable tracking changes at user for the field "Other Role" for any addition or removal via the System activities.Why is this feature important to you - We have processes updating the role to control access to folders based on user role and we need this info to troubleshoot issues when the role is not updated as expected.How would you like the feature to work -System activities section will show similarly to how Job Role (Primary) is displayedCurrent Behaviour -role id is tracked but this is tied to Primary role and not the Other role changes
DescriptionWould be amazing to have such button/feature on the document screen. Currently it's too easy to upload new, another document and pretty harder in comparison to update existing one to new version. In effect many people can opt to new doc upload instead of version update.
Description—Change the Background or issue an Alert if the User exceeds the required character count when entering text in a Form.For example, If we specified that this Field has a Max of 30-character count. It would be ideal to have either an Alert Message, change the background to Red, or even block the user from entering more than the specified maximum character limit. Why is this feature important to you - It prevents receiving incorrect information, which requires someone to review and follow up for correction. This takes time, and it increases the workload. How would you like the feature to work - It would be ideal to have either an Alert Message, change the background to Red, or even block the user from entering more than the specified maximum character limit. Current Behaviour - Currently, we add the character limit as part of the Question or in the tooltip, but it is mainly ignored. Users enter just a few additional characters which turns their copy unusable. We need to review, and request for the requestor to change. It is not an efficient process.
Delegation Enhancements:1 - The delegated assignments are not reflected on the workload balancer. 2 - Reports do not consider delegations - there is a delegationToID in the user object, but it would be a stretch to build reports this way.3 - Delegations remain on the work list for the delegated to and delegated by for two weeks after being marked compete - what would be the reasoning for this?4 - No indication of delegated tasks from the task view of a project.5 - No notifications settings for new items assigned during the delegation timeframe.6 – Delegations do not show on the new home screen for the delegates - they do show in the legacy worklist. Current Behaviour -Currently, we do not use this feature due to the aforementioned gaps/limitations. We instead manually swap out routing rules and use a report to re-assign in bulk. This is obviously a pretty manual approach and we would love to see some of the additional functionality added to the delegation feature.
Description -When searching - Include the Rule Name in the results. (Or have the rule name as a tool tip) Why is this feature important to you -It makes certain searches much more usable. For example: Search on prop32 gives you the screenshot below. The results are not helpful.How would you like the feature to work -When searching .. Display the Rule Name -> With the Rule Component to distinguish multiple results. Could be via a tooltip when mouse over to keep the same layout. Or prefix the Rule name (which can be ugly due to space). Or use 2 lines in new formatting (header / description style)Current Behavior - See attached screen shot
Description - Asking to allow access to backend fields that score card elements are saved in so that reports can be created from the answers to scorecard questions. For example, a report showing a graph based on answers to particular questions of a score card within projects of a portfolio. Why is this feature important to you - Without this feature I have to create a manual score card or duplicate data in the system as fields of a custom form to be able to use both the score card and be able to report on the answers of it. This is time consuming, difficult to maintain and redundant. How would you like the feature to work - I want to be able to have access to questions on a score card to be able to present answers to them in a report, or group by the questions in the score card and even create graph reports. Current Behaviour - Right now the only way to do this is to duplicate the score card questions as custom fields on a custom form.
Hi all, I think this is one of the critial issue every one has with the Adobe Analytics credential system. We use “product profile” for sharing workspace because Adobe shows “product profile” instead of “user group” in the box selection for sharing assets. That makes absolutely no sense and it’s not correct from a credential-strategy point of view.I need to share a report with a TEAM (user group), no with a CREDENTIAL SETTINGS SETS (product profile). We need to immeditalety bring to engineer/architect or product manager this point.We need this change now in Adobe Analytics. Companies with hundreds of users share reports every hour. Can you image how much "mess" and redundant settings we are accumulating in our account hour by hour just because of this credentials wierd behaviour? At the moment Adobe Analytics brings us to create additional product profile when we need to share reports with a group of users. In that product profile settings we also have to grant access to all report suites involved in workspaces we want to share (can you image the workload to keep everything aligned?!?!?!) (bytheway this is another unexpected recent news for credential point of view). You dont agree with my idea yet? Ok, listen to this: when users try to share any report, they can see in the box of user selection not just the list of other users, but also all the product profiles!!! ...do we want to share with the folk all our admin stuff??!!
There are times where a deployment is scheduled and we need to analyze performance before and after the specific date. I'd like the ability for the rolling date range to apply backwards, so I can create a range for the time prior to deployment as well that is reflective of the days currently used in the rolling date range after. So as I move two days away from the deployment, the backward range would include the two days prior for accurate comparison.
There isn't a direct integration between Google Lead Forms and Marketo. While it can be connected through third-party tools or via a CRM, can we explore a simpler solution for direct integration with Marketo?
Hi, We have recently moved from Pardot to Marketo and a key feature that we believe is missing from Marketo is the ability/permission to limit the number of emails a user can send via an email send program. Our business model means we often have people transitioning in and out of the business and the ability to limit a user email sending limit would allow us to have more confidence and lower risk that users could inadvertantly send to a large audience like the entire marketable database. In Pardot we had a hard limit of 20,000 emails per email send set at the user level. Which allowed us to mitigate against the problem. If anyone has any suggestions on how we could achieve this within the current limits of Marketo that would be welcome but we believe it is a feature that Marketo should have in the future.
We would like a send-time optimization feature available in Marketo for emails.
Description -The fallout visualization is super to understand user interaction by touchpoints and drop-outs.Yet sometimes I wished it would be able to visualize the data in a Flow diagram fashion / horizontal layout.Ideally, this could also contain information about the Visitor's next page / where they navigated to when they dropped out of the funnel. Why is this feature important to you - Flexibility of visualization and better understanding of user flow. How would you like the feature to work - Instead of the vertical funnel, visualize the data in a horizontal layout. Current Behaviour - vertical representation only
Description -In PoofHQ there is a blue dot within the text to signify an unread comment. it will gradually fade and then by the looks of it removed from the DOM. As the dot in located within the paragraph of the comment text, the text will move along to fill the space it used to take up. As the majority of edits I make to a working document are copied and pasted from ProofHQ comments, it can be tedious highlighting text only for it to move from under my mouse just as I am about to let go of the button, meaning I have to highlight it all again to copy fully - or having to wait until the dot removes itself before highlighting any text. Why is this feature important to you -It's an annoying thing to do, and with a large number of comments/markups to change per day it all adds up. How would you like the feature to work -The dot should either be relocated outside of the text area of a comment (preferred option), or fade but not be removed and still take up the same width as a visible dot. Current Behaviour -Dot fades and once fully faded is set to hidden or removed from the DOM.
Description -Why is this feature important to you - Customer has multiple version proofs, and they need "all version", "all pages" option for their audit purpose. How would you like the feature to work - All pages option should be available with All versions in proof print summaryCurrent Behavior - User can not choose the proofing print summary option for "all version " and "all Pages" option as he options to have "all pages " grayed out.
Description - Workfront should perform calculations based on "Currency" field for an issue. For instance, if the "Currency" field is populated with GBP, the system should treat it as GBP and reflect currency values accordingly, instead of relying on the project's default currency. Currently, if a project’s default currency is set to Euros due to the first issue added with lets say Euros currency, any subsequent issues, even if in a different currency like GBP, will still reflect in Euros. This leads to incorrect currency symbols and values being displayed. Why is this feature important to you - This feature is critical because it ensures the accuracy of financial data in Workfront. Incorrect currency representation can lead to misinterpretation of financials, impacting decision-making and reporting. Having the ability to reflect the actual currency based on the specific "Currency" field is essential for accurate project tracking and financial integrity. How would you like the feature to work -The system should either:Use the specified "Currency" field to determine and reflect the correct currency symbol and values, orConvert the currency based on exchange rates when a different currency is used, and then reflect the converted value in the project’s default currency.Current Behaviour - Currently, Workfront relies on the project’s default currency for all issues, even when a different currency is specified in the "Currency" field. This results in incorrect currency symbols and values being displayed, leading to potential errors in financial reporting. We've discussed this with the Workfront support team(Whittney Clark), who acknowledged it as an issue and suggested it as an enhancement. Immediate attention to this issue is necessary to avoid further inaccuracies. Let me know if you need any additional information from my end.
Description - add a field type to custom forms that get related object data. It gets related through the Typeahead field. Possibly also from the External Lookup fieldWhy is this feature important to you - I often want to display data that is on another object. I just need to link to it through a typeahead or lookup type of field, but then show say 5 pieces of data from that selected recordHow would you like the feature to work - Add a new "related field" field type...that references the object selected in a typeaheadCurrent Behaviour -Can only see the Typeahead Name
Description - If the request form was able to know that it was under a particular project when it is created, then you should be able to have calculated values that already see the Project/Program/Portfolio valuesWhy is this feature important to you - This would allow display of data that is relevant at the time of input rather than needing to Save and then come back into the same object. This would allow Fusion to work better on the "New" records and also allow negate the need to use Approval routines to step into the process so that automated actions only happen when Approved. The requestor often being the approver, after they have gotten data from the Project levelHow would you like the feature to work - Connect the dots, either to the request queue/project the request or issue initiated on or to a selected object through Typeahead fieldsCurrent Behaviour - Request/Issue is disconnected when started. It does not know its relationship to the object from which it was initiated.
Description - Allow a calculation to determine the display or not of a fieldWhy is this feature important to you - rather than adding lots of rules, it could be built easier in a formulaHow would you like the feature to work - Use the calculation engine as an optionCurrent Behaviour - just fields above on the form
Description - provide for formatting of the calculated field, not just into text, number, currency but also in BOLD or colorsWhy is this feature important to you - Sometimes you want to warn people that what they are entering is incorrect or does not match some other need. But the text just comes in in the same old Grey that other fields have. It would be much more obvious if you could change the formattingHow would you like the feature to work - Allow either the whole of the text to be formatted or conditionally formatted.Current Behaviour - Just plain grey
Description -Why is this feature important to you - Many times due to the bug in the code, APP can send erroneous hits to Adobe Analytics resulting in increase in server calls. As far as Native Mobile Apps are concerned, there are so many services they utilize in background and foreground. Some time due to coding issues, there may be erroneous hits to Adobe Analytics. It requires new release to fix the issue. But if Adobe Launch provides ability to block these server calls, it would be so helpful. I am currently facing issue where APP is sending background track action calls erroneously resulting in 30 Million hits a month.How would you like the feature to work - Please find the attached image. How about adding new event type suppress/disable data along with modify and attach data.Current Behavior - It does not provide this feature.
PLEASE UPVOTE THIS IF YOU NEED IT.A few months ago, Adobe added a new feature to Analysis Workspace that exposed a data dictionary.https://experienceleague.adobe.com/docs/analytics/analyze/analysis-workspace/components/data-dictionary/data-dictionary-overview.html?lang=en We use the Analytics API often and would like to have the Data Dictionary data exposed in the Analytics API. Currently, the data in the data dictionary is unavailable to the API. Extracting this data would be valuable for documentation and internal reporting. By exposing the Data Dictionary data in the AA API, we can streamline the governance of our data collection components and report on relationships between components. (components typically used with selected components) We will also be able to perform the following programmatically:Identify duplicate components that need to be consolidated.Identify components that aren’t collecting any data so they can be either updated or deleted.Identify components that are not yet approved.Update component descriptions directly in Adobe Analysis API so that any updates made to the component descriptions in the Data Dictionary are reflected in the Report Suite. We want AA API access to the following:Component Type, Description, Approved/Unapproved, Frequently Used With, Similar To, Tags. Thank you for your consideration
Currently, with documents, if you want to edit custom fields on documents, you have to go 1-by-1 and add the custom form, then fill out the custom field data. It would be so much better if you could in-line edit the custom fields just like you can do in a task list or project list. With the process being so time-consuming and easy for users to overlook, we have great trouble getting custom data entered consistently.
This post has been closed as a duplicate. All votes have been moved to the original: PARENT/CHILD PROJECTS Several workfront users have asked about linking projects in Workfront. For example, one project would be developing the theme for a series of other projects, and each of those other projects would be linked to the master project.
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.
