Adobe Workfront

A HUGE thank you to ​@MikeEngel  for sharing all his knowledge on the Unified Approvals transition! We realize there were a lot of unanswered questions from the chat so we are working on a consolidated Q&A that we’ll post here later, as well as discussing additional webinars to address these!  As discussed today, access to Unified Approvals will be based on your Workfront contract renewal date, but if you want to get access earlier, reach out to your account team to see if you can recontract early! Below are a summary, links to the slide deck, recording, and resources! Senior Product Manager Mike Engel shared updates on the new Unified Approvals experience, bringing enhanced review and collaboration tools for both video and non-video assets. Mike demo’d the new experience, including annotation and collaboration tools. He also discussed the transition, which will allow teams to adopt it in stages (using both legacy and new approvals, as needed) as well as potential future capabiliti

I need to export historical Proofing information from Workfront as a client transitions from a parent company’s version of Workfront to their own.Using an OAuth2 application configured in Workfront, I’m able to access the Workfront API to export project and document information from Workfront, but it appears that the Proofing information only lives within the embedded Proof HQ instance (please correct me if I’m wrong).Since this is not a standalone Workflow Proofing instance, but rather it’s integrated and accessed via Workfront, which uses IMS authentication, I cannot “log in” to the Proof HQ API using a user/password (I have no password in Proof HQ).As such, I’m attempting to authenticate with Proof HQ by calling the https://api.proofhq.com/home/authentication/getsessionid.html SOAP API, but can’t seem to get it to work.  I’ve tried the following SOAP envelope:````<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><soapenv:Envelope xmlns:soapenv="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/

For those registered for Understanding Unified Approvals: Direction, Reporting, and What’s Next, would you be interested in follow‑up working sessions to unpack the upcoming approval workflow changes? Looking to exchange implications, open questions, and practical change‑management strategies—comment or react if you’d like to participate or suggest discussion topics.

Hi team , We need some clarification on how the actual duration and duration is calculated in task level . we have some task that has actual duration as 11.26 how these decimal value is calculated ?.Can you advice how it is calculated with an example .

Hi All,I am trying to query / pull the “Project Sharing” settings of a project template via the Workfront API / in Fusion, but can’t figure out how to do this.The accessRules collection includes only the “Template Sharing” settings, but not the “Project Sharing” settings.Does anyone have an idea on how to do it? Or this not supported currently by the (versioned) API?Thank you,Tibor

I am trying to run a scenario that will trigger when a custom field is edited. The issue I am having is configuring a filter based on the oldState value being blank. Meaning if the field changes, but data existed in the field prior to the change, the scenario will not proceed.How can I configure a module to read the values of the oldState shortly after the trigger? Thank you 

I am looking for best practices regarding environment promotion, specifically for Project Templates. Based on my experience, and confirmed by Adobe, you cannot edit a Project Template and promote those changes to Production IF any of your changes involve deleting tasks. For example, if, in Production, i have tasks 1-4 on my project template, and then i edit that template in SB to add tasks 5-6 BUT also delete tasks 3-4, upon promotion, my project template in prod will contain tasks 1-6 As a result, we cannot promote any updates to our project templates from SB to Prod without then needing to deactivate the template and making manual updates immediately after. Has anybody else had a similar issue? There are workarounds, but this feels like a serious shortcoming of the WF environment promotion process. Am I approaching this wrong? Any best practices/solutions/workarounds to reduce manual intervention?

Need to have better UI to upload documents currently when drag and doping the documents Its a small black box not very easy to do the upload when adding documents in bulk if go little below the black drop while drag the documents the document opens in a new tab instead of uploading.

Hi! I am getting a lot of conflicting information about marking custom fields in-active once I move them to an Admin section of a request form. My end goal is to make sure all of these old custom fields remain in my historical reporting. By marking them in-active, am I inadvertantly removing them from my historical reporting? I thought in-active was just making sure these custom fields are no longer active. Any guidance or insight is greatly appreciated. I have a huge update next week that I am prepping for! I want to make sure everything is done correctly. :-)  As always, this community rocks. 😁

Hi team ,Issue OverviewWe recently encountered an issue in Adobe Workfront where users were unable to view a project, even though everything appeared to be configured correctly. ScenarioA project was created by a user who belongs to: Parent Group: International Subgroup: INTL MKT GROUP The user’s Home Group was set to INTL MKT GROUP The project was also created under INTL MKT GROUPThe project was shared with three users who were also members of the same subgroup.ProblemOut of the three users:✅ One user could see the project ❌ Two users could not see the projectThis was unexpected because:All users belonged to the same subgroup The project was correctly aligned to that subgroup Sharing permissions were applied No filters were restricting visibility ResolutionWhen the two affected users were additionally added to the parent group (International):✅ The project immediately became visible to them Key ObservationEven though:The project was assigned to the subgroup Users were members of the

We have a situation where we have created a new view in Projects’ documents to show (100s of) documents and proofs on projects. However, the ‘version’ column always shows documents at v1 but when a proof is created and is techinically a v1 proof, it shows v2 in the column and is very misleading.I have looked at many ways to work around this using text mode but everythings draws up a blank column.Has anyone else come across this and found a solution?Thanks!

With the newest updates to the Learn area for Workfront, I'm wondering if anyone has put together any training plans to make the data a more cohesive flow.    Examples: Getting to know Workfront Workfront for Workers Workfront for Planners Workfront for Admins Workfront for collaborators/requesters/reviewers     I previously had one, but all the links are broken so looking for fresh ideas before I rebuild. 

Is there a way, maybe based on Routing Rules, Topic Groups, Queue Topics, or something else I’m not considering to either trigger logic inside the request form or skip sections of the request form?We utilize one master project request queue that routes to a master request form for our entire company. There was reasoning and strategy behind this, but the ultimate result is a form that asks a large amount of qualifying questions before you are routed to the specific section you’re trying to complete.  I’m hoping there’s a way to bypass some of the preliminary routing steps if the projects are intended for my team or possibly my queue topic.I’m not exactly a power user of Workfront so I apologize in advance for asking questions that may have an obvious answer, I’ve tried my best to research on my own.

Stumped on a particular challenge regarding issue approvals.  I have a use case where a particular issue type needs to route to a group of approximately 10-12 senior leaders for sign off (think traditional executive stage gate process.).  All are expected to review simultaneously, as staging the reviews exec by exec would be time-prohibitive.    The challenge here is that if even one person rejects, the approval workflow halts, possibly before all stakeholders have had a chance to review.  And re-engaging the workflow starts over and requires that everyone review again (which would normally make sense, but in this case, is not desired.) The process owner would ideally like to capture all decisions (approvals and rejections) and then, if a consensus isn’t reached, escalate to higher level decision-maker.  The only workaround I’ve come up with is to leverage a custom form to capture individual decisions rather than using the automated workflow. But that obviously comes with some serious

Those who regularly attend the CS Scale webinars know this topic occasionally comes up, but I’d like to crowdsource here: What are the pros and cons of allowing users to copy projects? Currently copying projects is prohibited in our instance, but I have project managers begging me to allow copying. I promised I would re-evaluate. I’m asking y’all to get into the weeds so my PMS better understand what they’re getting into:What junk comes with copying projects? Think about both the PM and system admin. If we allow copying, what are the best practices for keeping copied projects clean? What are the alternate approaches? I’ll start:What junk comes with copying projects?You can opt out of copying a bunch of things, which seems to solve a lot of this problem, but it comes with other problems:When you clear Assignments, it also removes job roles. When you clear Documents, it also clears folder structures. (Consider these neutral/dependent on your governance) Whether you like it or not, copyin

Description: The current process for updating the calculation within an existing calculated form field requires a highly manual and time-consuming workflow. This involves removing the field from every form where it's used, saving each form, then re-adding the field to each form, re-entering the calculation, and saving again.Why is this feature important to you? This feature is critical for efficiency and accuracy. The current manual process is extremely time-consuming, especially given that we have approximately 30 active and 30 inactive forms that utilize these fields. This creates a significant administrative burden and increases the risk of errors during the re-entry process. Automating this would free up valuable time and ensure consistent application of calculations across all relevant forms.How would you like the feature to work? Ideally, there would be a more streamlined method to manage calculated custom form fields. This could involve:Bulk Field Management: The ability to bulk

Hello - Does the priorities table in Workfront Home display items (tasks) only when the project status is set to current, and not show them when the status is planning? Can someone confirm please? 

Hello - On a WF custom request form, I am trying to create a calculated field that totals the values generated in other calculated fields. If it matters, the other calculated fields plus corresponding fill-in fields for quantity entries are set to display only when a selection is made from a separate dropdown field. For the other calculated fields, I am multiplying the quantity entries by specific numbers using the PROD expression: e.g.,  PROD({DE:Ad or Graphic Qty},100)So, the user selects one or more choices from a dropdown field (e.g., Ad or Graphic)A new field/fields then displays to enter a quantity for the selected option (Ad or Graphic Qty - this field formatted as a number). The PROD calculated field (Ad or Graphic Cost - also formatted as a number) also then displays. This calculated field works as expected. The last calculated field is set up to SUM all of the previous calculated fields, but the number always comes up as 0: e.g., SUM({DE:Ad or Graphic Cost}, {DE:Banner-Std Co

Is this a bug……...I’m seeing that if a collapsed form is never “opened”, even if there are required fields in the custom form, you can submit the form. In essence the required fields are not holding true. 

Hi all,Looking for an experienced Fusion Developer to support automation and integration efforts.  Thanks