Build better products with our product team
I think it would be a benefit to add "Last Opened" in the Action in the Audit Log. We our team creating workspaces, we want to make sure these are being used. If they are not after 1 year, these should be deleted, to keep user accessing most current and valid workspace. This also helps maintain not only workspaces, but filters as well.
Description - Add ability to convert a request to an overall program Why is this feature important to you - Often multiple projects are needed within one program How would you like the feature to work - Similar to converting a request to a project, except it converts it to a program Current Behaviour - Not possible right now
Hi All I recently explored "custom quarters" function and found that by imputing preferred date range I can achieve a fiscal years which than can be used for reporting (details, matrix, charts). The flaw is however that it stops users to use calendar quarters grouping. Id like to see an option in the setup to enable "Custom Years" Thanks Lukasz
As a technical solution provider, I would like to provide enhanced opportunity information across Marketo behaviors--and ideally, without the use of a separate CRM. However, when a CRM is attached to Marketo, there are several issues with translating Marketo opportunity activity: Activities such as Add to Opportunity/Remove from Opportunity/Update Opportunity (Activity IDs 34-36) use an integer as the identifying value for an opportunity. For example, a recent "Add to Opportunity" activity returns the following:{"id":98506929,"marketoGUID":"98506929","leadId":2054980,"activityDate":"2024-05-01T09:40:00Z","activityTypeId":34,"primaryAttributeValueId":72984,"primaryAttributeValue":"Opportunity Name - 2024","attributes":[{"name":"Is Primary","value":true},{"name":"Role","value":"Relevant Executive"}]}, This results in an Opportunity ID value of "72984." While I can work backward using the primaryAttributeValue to match via the opportunity name, this is less than ideal. There is also no reference to any externalOpportunityId, which would be used in this case (the instance is synced to an SFDC instance).Querying Marketo's own recording of opportunities independent of the CRM results in displaying a UUIDv4 value, but there is no reference to either the integer value on the Opportunity-related Activities value that could be used to cross-reference between systems:{"requestId":"11802#18fdeddf644","result":[{"seq":0,"marketoGUID":"be320968-423a-48e2-9730-e2e08df61fae","externalOpportunityId":"0061R00000m3kRLQAY","updatedAt":"2023-09-06T01:27:58Z","createdAt":"2018-12-17T15:43:08Z"}],"success":true}The marketoGUID is written activity-style rather than reading from the integers recorded in the opportunity-related activity. This leaves no way to resolve Marketo's own ID systems to tie the data together.Could you provide either the GUID in the activity or the integer in the main Opportunity query? Likewise, since something is translating the integral Opportunity ID to the Salesforce Opportunity Name, could the externalOpportunityId be exposed as a value on Opportunity-related activities? Otherwise, this data is disjointed and can only be poorly unioned together.
Description - I would be amazing if the revision comparison tool could toogle between "standard" side-by-side visualization (micro-changes, as is) into a more high level rule view.Meaning, the current version comparison tool helps to a certain distinct, but sometimes I would prefer if Tags could visualize the versions of the Rule, as a side by side view, but the same way the Rule look like when you regularily open them. Why is this feature important to you - The holistic view on structure of the Rule helps me understand the functioning better than the minized view as is. How would you like the feature to work - Have a different view option in the side by side view that lets you toggle the views. In this split screen, it should be possible to see all custom code of that specific version like normal Current Behaviour - only the optimized/minimalisitic view exists Let me know what you think
Similar to other areas in Workfront we would like to have the ability to assign board members different levels of access (sharing). E.g. a level to manage the entire boad (create new columns, settings etc.), whilst other levels have limited access (not able to add new members, nor to create columns, or to change the card filter). Currently, we also cannot change the board owner (as stated in another idea already - https://experienceleaguecommunities.adobe.com/t5/workfront-ideas/boards-change-or-delete-the-board-owner/idi-p/622339).
Currently breaking down hours or expenses of certain categorisations against a project or task are challenging. Typically an integration needs to be put in place, to pull data aggregate it and write it back, this increases cost, latency and encourages data to be extracted and viewed from outhr solutions. Have the ability to write a query such as the External look up field, as a value (not a selection), that is triggered to run an update as and when that custom data form is updated would significantly enhance reporting flexibility and deliver greater insights.
Hi guys,in AEM it is possible to create technical accounts and use them for integrations:https://experienceleague.adobe.com/en/docs/experience-manager-learn/getting-started-with-aem-headless/authentication/service-credentialsWe would appreciate having the same opportunity in Workfront. These type of users have a clear advantage in terms of maintenance and security.Especially in conjuntion with the Workfront AEM Native Connector we are facing the issue that the user being used for the Fusion Workfront Module connection has to coexist in AEM. This coupling including the named disadvanteges in terms of maintenance and security are a risk for the production environment.As a workaround we are now forced to use the Fusion Authenticator module in order to work with technical accounts.
When editing an approval (task/project/issue) it would be nice to be able to reorder the stages rather than remove and add back in.
Description - The CJA Audit Log under Tools is a good feature, however, it is difficult to retrieve and analyze usage with a date range that spans more than one day. This is because only 200 rows of data are retrieved with each scroll and the Download feature does not asynchronously retrieve and download all data. Since all data for the date range must be manually scrolled/loaded into the UI before downloading, it is time consuming and difficult to analyze data offline for (as one example) a week date range which has more than 9,000 rows in our case. Why is this feature important to you - Needed to download and analyze data offline. For example, would be used to identify power users of the application so I know who to invite (of my 80 users) to a power users forum. How would you like the feature to work - After clicking download, the app should asynchronously download all data and make the file available when ready. Current Behaviour - Unfortunately, it only prepares a file with what has been retrieved into the UI and that may be a very small portion of the entire data set when using a range of dates.
Description - A Project's Issue has Status options including "In Progress" and "Closed".Why is this feature important to you - Awareness of the Status is crucial to the project for User Group A but not crucial for User Group B.How would you like the feature to work - It is preferred that changing the current Status of an Issue can be allowed only by User Group A.Current Behavior - Any Contributor to the Project can change the Status of any Issue in the Project. After looking through this with Support, and no solution, maybe a possibility is creating a View for User group B, a view that does not show the Status.
Description -Why is this feature important to you -How would you like the feature to work -Current Behaviour -
Description - Increase Workfront object's (project, task, issue, program) title to be full screen width across top header and wrap so can see the full title without mouse hover over. Why is this feature important to you - The object's title field is by far the most vital piece of information on an object. Our titles can be rather long when we have a prefix for the team, title/short description, year, and work type. And because we prefix many names the same, when the screen is standard size, all you see is the prefix which is not enough. Users must hover over the title and wait to see the full name. How would you like the feature to work - Workfront's object titles should span the full window length AND wrap if longer than window width so the full title can be seen without a mouse hover over. The other header information such as percent complete, assignees, status, etc should be in a row UNDERNEATH the title. This would also allow for more room to add more/different custom fields to the object header. Current Behaviour - Object title is so narrow that can only read a few characters even in 100%/standard zoom. See attachment
DescriptionAllow us to create Access Levels that have the same benefit of an Administrator by granting them View access to all records across the instance, but allows us to limit their ability to modify, create, or delete records. Why is this feature important to youWe have a number of accounts that are designated as service accounts. To protect our data from being inadvertently modified or deleted, we have to create a custom view-only Access Level that allows the service account to read records but not modify, create, or delete records. This means we have to spend a lot of time ensuring these service accounts are shared on all the relevant records in our instance. It would save a lot of time and energy if we could create Access Levels that allow an account unlimited read access, but limited write/delete access. How would you like the feature to workEnable an option on the Access Level editor to grant "Admin View Access" which would allows accounts using that Access Level to view/read any record in the instance while still allowing us to customize which objects the Access Level can create, modify, or delete. Current BehaviourWe cannot assign the Administrator Access Level to our service accounts without accepting the risk that those accounts may overwrite or delete data. We therefore create view-only Access Levels to assign, then spend a lot of time and energy making sure the service accounts are shared on everything. The ability for us to create a "view-only with admin rights" account would be safer and easier for us to manage.
This seems like a no brainer, as it adds no value to the Marketing team to see the GUID of all the synced Lookup fields from the Dynamics CRM integration with CRM.So, to see an actual value, well, it makes 100% difference in the product.
Description: The Awaiting my approval widget is ALMOST really useful. It would be even better IF it contained proof deadline information. Why is this feature important to you: Many of our users, especially Legal and Compliance rely on Workfront to conduct asset reviews. Part of their requirements are a means of prioritizing their work. In it's current state, this widget does not provide that ability. How would you like the feature to work: I would like an additional column to be populated in the middle of the widget with proof deadline information and for the proofs to be natively sorted in deadline order. This will help our proof decision makers prioritize their decisions. Current Behaviour: It doesn't exist. It currently has the entry date with no explanation of what that date is, which is confusing to customers. For what it's worth, I would also like to see a proofs I need to review Widget with the same access and prioritization functional for folks who do NOT have decision making rights but are need to make comments.
Similar to Teams and Slack (@channel, @3664304) , the ability to have @project and the update goes to all the users on the project team. Individually entering in users names is time consuming and people get missed quickly.
Description - Would like to be able to turn on and off different notification types for specific projects. It would be great if we could manage it through Groups and have the notification settings apply to a project to which that group is assigned. Group notification settings only work for the people in the Group, but we want them to apply to anyone who submits a request to a project queue. Why is this feature important to you - People working the requests and tickets in the queue want to be able to make Update comments on submitted requests without the submitter getting notified. How would you like the feature to work - Similar to custom statuses set at the Group level, it would be great if we could have the notification settings for a Group apply to any project that is assigned to that Group regardless of whether or not the user is in the group.Current Behaviour - The only way to turn off or on notifications for this project would be for me to do it at the global level. Most of the people submitting requests are from all over the business and are autoprovisioned a requester license when they submit one. Every time someone on the support team makes an update note in the comment, the original requester gets notified because that is what we have set at the global level. The Group level settings are only applying to the people on the support team who are in that Group.
Description - we would like to know how many attributes that have been ingested into AEP is actually in use for segment creation. Why is this feature important to you - it will let show the value of aep to our client and/or control the need of data ingestion How would you like the feature to work - we would like to consult the aggregated number of attributes that has been used in segment creation in one place in AEP. Additionally would be great to see the breakdown among the tables and the breakdown among attributes activated into the destination and those that are not. Current Behaviour - we can access the segment one by one to extract this data, which is very time consuming
A new home workspace widget that displays specific reports or dashboards based upon setup by a system administrator, would allow users that primarily work from reports or view dashboards to more effectively use the home workspace. There are several executives, financial analysts, and auditors that login to our Workfront environment primarily to run and view reports/dashboards. It would be more user-friendly and easier to train these types of users if all of the reports or dashboards that they need could be viewed and run from a "My Reports" widget. Ideally system administrators could use specific folders or tags to indicate which reports should appear within the "My Reports" widget by role. That way if an executive logged into Workfront they could see a targeted list of reports or dashboards. This would also provide a larger list of reports, as there are only so many pins that can be added to the top menu. Today as a system administrator, I either have to customize a layout with specific pins based upon role and then use the "Log In As" feature to add other pins manually per user to direct them to specific reports. Or you have to be strategic about which reports or dashboards are shared and teach the users to navigate to Reports or Dashboards. A customized report widget would keep several of these users happily on their home workspace and allow system administrators to swap out, remove, or add reports as needed with no additional training required.
Allow system administrators to customize where the Quick Actions direct the users within the My Projects widget. System administrators would also need the ability to hide/remove certain quick actions that are not in use at their organization. This feature would be extremely helpful in streamlining regular project updates for users, so that they could jump right to specific areas of their projects to make changes all from their home workspace. Today the Quick Actions only allow the user to "upload a file", "edit a project custom form", "add a new project update", or "add a new project task". If a system administrator could modify or add quick actions, then a user could potentially open a status update form, add a risk to a project, or run a project report.
Currently if you delete a feed it remains in the feed list with the status deleted. I appreciate you can use the filters to filetr by active. However it would be good to be able to clean up the list with the ability to permanently remove from the feeds list.
Description - The new abilty for admins to add columns to select widgets on the homescreen helps customize the information that the user is seeing, without the user making the adjustments themselves. Currently, once the System Admin adds columns to the "My Projects" widget, users must manually go to their widget and toggle on the columns and reorder them in "views". There is no way to bulk add additional columns to their widget. Why is this feature important to you - Adjusting what a select group of users sees on their home screen ensures that each user group is getting the right information they need to do their job. Our users love the new home and widgets, and customizing what they see helps improve training and user adoption. How would you like the feature to work -It would be great if this could have the same functionality as assigning a view on a report, and it is automatically loaded for anyone with that layout template. Please upvote (like) this if you would like to see this feature updated to allow sys admins to bulk update columns and views in the "My Projects" widget.
It is unreasonable that the Smart Assignments feature is a default and not optional.Resource Managers are unable to readily locate users with specific roles to assign to tasks. When assigning each batch of tasks, RMs must often type out the entire name of the user before the user is recognized by the system. In many cases, there are only a few users with the appropriate role who can be assigned to specific tasks—RMs are spending twice as much time pulling up the correct user and the lag for populating the assignment is inordinately long given the simplicity of the action. Smart Assignments needs to seek the role specific assignment first, with the ability to opt-in using AI for assigning.According to our resource managers, assigning has become troublesome and they have created the workaround of closing out the project they are setting up, refreshing, and then setting up assignments. Sometimes that helps and sometimes you need to spell out a full first and last name then wait up to 30 seconds for the name to appear.
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: When moving an asset/folder via the Move action, we want this page to sort the folders alphabetically, instead of by creation date. The creation date sort is confusing to users as many do not know when a folder was created, making the desired folders difficult to find in the list. Use-case: Users should have the ability to sort while using the Move functionality Current/Experienced Behavior: Users can move asset but no feature to sort folders alphabetically it is last modified Improved/Expected Behavior: Users have ability to sort folders alphabetically Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): AEMAACS Customer-name/Organization name: Epsilon Screenshot (if applicable): Code package (if applicable):
Already have an account? Login
Enter your E-mail address. We'll send you an e-mail with instructions to reset your password.
