Adobe Workfront

Can a validation rule be setup that only allows users from a particular group to access a form field?  I’m trying something along these lines but I can’t get the syntax correct.IF($$USER.groupIDs="69fcf9d70002183a0944fbb90b78a5ab", "Only members of the LP Approval group can edit this field.")Any help would be appreciated.ThanksFrank

As the Workfront Second Quarter Release is scheduled for next week (April 16 - Quarterly Release, April 15 - Monthly/Fast Release), this webinar highlighted a handful of enhancements coming to Advanced Enterprise Operations, Unified Approvals (the future of proofing in Workfront), Reporting, Fusion, and Workfront Planning. There are several demos in the on-demand recording, so it’s a bit longer than usual - plan for 75 minutes unless you watch on 2x speed.  If you weren't able to attend - no worries! The links to the slide deck, recording, and Q&A are listed below. Be sure to review the release notes on Experience League, as not all feature enhancements were covered in the webinar today!  Webinar Recording  Slide Deck PDF - note that the videos cannot be replayed in the slide deck PDF, so I’ve included links to those below  All videos from the section, Advanced Enterprise Operations Enhancements, can be found here - Financial Management (slide 18), Enhanced Layout Templates (sl

Thanks to everyone who joined today’s workshop on Mastering Business Rules and Validation Logic in Adobe Workfront! The session was led by Adobe Workfront’s Tina Craig, Principal Business Consultant, Content Supply Chain, who shared several examples and best practices for using these new features to help with governance (and reduce the redundant reminders from admins)! Workshop Summary:Validation logic prevents form submission when criteria are met; business rules prevent object creation, deletion, and editing across system. Validation logic uses if-then statements on custom form fields; business rules are configured in the Setup area with broader scope (only available to customers on the Workflow Ultimate package). Practical examples like special character restrictions, character limits, date constraints, SLA enforcement, and multi-option selections were demo’ed.  Remember! Always test in Sandbox before production deployment to prevent workflow disruption. If you weren’t able to join

I’m hoping someone can help me understand why reviewers/approvers on a proof are receiving two different approval experiences. In some cases, reviewers are prompted to “make a decision,” while in other cases they are only given the options “Approve,” “Approve with Changes,” or “Needs Work,” which is the workflow we want to use consistently. Because the options presented are not the same for all reviewers/approvers, it creates confusion in our review and approval process. Could you clarify what causes these different approval methods to be sent, and whether there is a setting or configuration that controls this behavior?I’m also seeing what appears to be a related issue when I upload a new document to a project. I automatically receive an approval notice in my Home widget, even though these documents do not actually require my approval. Note: when we upload documents, they automatically create a proof.   In this situation, I am consistently asked to ‘Make a Decision’.   This clutters th

If you just got back from Adobe Summit 2026 (or wished you had), this is the event you don't want to miss. The Workfront WUG – Southern California is hosting a virtual after party on May 12, 2026 — and we're skipping the polished recaps in favor of the real conversation.What announcements will actually change how your team works? What's worth bringing back to your org — and what's just hype? Our expert panelists are ready to give you their unfiltered takes on Workfront, content supply chain innovation, and AI. No fluff. Just clarity, candor, and a little healthy debate.🗓️ May 12, 2026 | VirtualAll chapters, members, and guests welcomeRegister here: https://workfront-augs.adobe.com/events/details/adobe-workfront-wug-southern-california-presents-spill-the-tea-adobe-summit-2026-after-party/Mega-WUGs are special virtual events where all Workfront User Group (WUG) chapters are invited. Not familiar with WUG?  Learn more here.

I’m curious who is using Priorities and whether it’s working well for your team. I’ve been playing around with it for a while and really like the UI and overall functionality, but it still feels a bit too “clicky” for me to comfortably roll out to our teams.For example, our Creative team lives in their assigned tasks and frequently jumps into the project custom form to view requirements/details. In Priorities, it seems like they need to click into the project name and then click “Go to details” from the side panel to get there. Am I missing an easier way to navigate this?Would love to hear how others are using Priorities in similar workflows/scenarios.

We have Workfront contributors that will view a monthly report that contains a proof link, where they can view a document proof. For these users, all User notification settings set to off. However, when they click to view the Document Proof, Workfront is adding them as a “Reviewer” to the Document Proof and automatically subscribing them to receive Daily Summaries for that project. We tested resolution by keeping them as Reviewer with Proof notification settings disable. However, next month when they view the report again, it auto-defaults to start sending Daily Summaries. This is an issue, as these particular users cannot get bogged down with the details within those daily summaries for each project, and we need to control this scenario to protect their inbox.Has anyone else experienced this and/or found a resolution? I saw a past post in Experience League, but it was marked as “resolved” due to inactivity on comments, but with no resolution.

Hello, I know i can bring this in a task report, but Is there anyway I can bring in lastnote: note text in a note report?

Is it possible using custom form validation to only allow a particular field to be edited by only 2 users?I tried it on 1 user but it isn’t a valid expression. IF($USER!="609974980022b44f8ff9fc5e51b8516f", "You are not authorized to edit this field.") or maybeIF {$$USER}.{emailAddr} = "john.Doe@mscdirect.com", true)Any help is appreciated.  

Why is this feature important to you -My PMO manages projects for a Creative Studio Resource. At any given time there are more than 100 projects open. When we are looking at that teams Workload Balancer we can't tell easily which projects are running ahead or behind as there is no way to see the Priority. The Priority is a field in the Overview section on a Project under Basic Information that is an out of the box field. Today we utilize Flexible and Firm Deadline to know if the Creative Studio has more time or not for their task. They appear in green (Flexible) and red (Firm Deadline). How would you like the feature to work -If Priority was added as one of the Color Theme, then it would color code the projects on the Workload Balancer - green (Flexible) and red (Firm Deadline). Benefits - Team members can see which projects are most critical (green and red), fostering alignment and urgency. Color-coded priorities help visualize workload distribution and plan for capacity more effectiv

Hi everyone - I’m building a task report for my team. Most of the fields I am referencing are related to the project and task however there are a few fields I need to reference from the converted request. I haven’t been able to figure out how to pull in the converted request reference number. The best I can do is the request name. I tried to see if I could pull it in by tweaking text mode but I’m still learning and don’t really know what I’m doing.  Any assitance or guidance is appreciated. 

I built a document report that includes the Current Version » Proof Decision field.  I added a filter to include only those documents where this decision field is not blank.In addition to the expected decision values--approved, approved with changes, changes required, pending--I’m also seeing a “-” value:  Does anyone know what exactly this “-” value reflects?  I don’t work a lot with proofs themselves (I’m just reporting on them), so I’m not sure what conditions might produce this value.The API Explorer just lists the field as a non-groupable string, but it doesn’t specify possible values.Thanks.

Description - Would like to be able to have a portal set up where vendors could upload assets into projects without giving them any access to Workfront.Why is this feature important to you - This would allow vendor partners the ability to supply assets without needing to be a native user of Workfront. This would also help with internal security to intake assets that are needed but not granting accounts to external partners. This would eliminate manual uploads from internal employees after receiving the assets from the vendors via email, vendor tools, etc.How would you like the feature to work - Potentially leverage existing request area but allow them to be external facing and password protected to allow vendors to submit assets and have them map to the appropriate projects without using Fusion. Current Behavior: This does not exist. Currently, trying to leverage SharePoint and OneDrive integrations but there have been issues in the past with vendor partners not being able to these too

We are exploring ways on how we can receive files from vendors without having them in Workfront as a user.  Our use case is that we need to be able to receive upload files for projects but we do not want to have our vendor in the system as a user for security purposes. We are thinking of using the Sharepoint Integration and have the vendor upload through there and then connect to the projects as one possible solution but there have been issues with using SharePoint in the past with vendors. We are exploring Planning and are wondering if there could be a way to intake assets through a public form and then have an automation direct documents to the appropriate projects. Essentially using this form like a portal for vendors. Curious if anyone has done this before? Also, open to any ideas and recommendations for other solutions on how others are working to receive assets from vendors without giving Workfront access. Thank you!

Hi folks!!What I want to do is have the total hours in a timesheet grouped up by a Team.Then have an average of that amount by the number of people in that team. So that it spits out something like, Team a 42 hrs, Team B 47 hours. Etc etc.I was trying to group the hours by home team, but then the average was calculating the average of the individual hours entered, so it was showing 2.66 and such as each individual input of hours was around 1-4 at a time.It may be something that it cant do as a native report. I got quite far in getting it to add up all the total hours in a timesheet for a team, but it cant average by the amount of users in the team, (at least it wasn’t a standard option).Any help as always appreciated!

Hi Workfront Community,Has anyone created functionality in Workfront that enables users to scope initiatives that are in the sales pipeline, but not yet converted to a closed deal?Currently, our Client Partners team puts together SOWs and scopes for various products and services we offer.  They do this in scoping spreadsheets right now to get an idea of estimated hours, resources, teams and revenue that will be involved.In the past, we had “scoping” projects in Workfront, defined by a custom project status, where we created tasks, with hours and resources, and although this worked for a while, users wanted something with more flexibility and thus moved to spreadsheets.Just seeing if anyone has implemented solutions in Workfront for this, as this will help with my ideation process.Thanks!Nick

I have a report that totals the number of label jobs in a day, and each job has a quantity.The results are grouped by day, so the summary tab has the date, count of jobs for each day, and a total sum of labels produced (custom field - number format).the data displays properly on the summary tab, and the complete data shows up on a PDF export, but the Sum column has no data in the excel data exports.  if i export tab delimited to notebook, the totals are also there.  any help?  thank you. 

Our users are reporting broken functionality inside Workfront’s ProofHQ tools. It also appears the UI has changed slightly, so we suspect there may have been some sort of recent release? I couldn’t find anything conclusive in the release log.  Please see screenshot below for a detailed report, but essentially the text selection tools are no longer populating text, line breaks aren’t being respected, and the “edit” button erases all content. We’ve also had users unable to save copy/pasted text.  Insights are much appreciated. Thanks!   

There should be a capability to either remove or disable the native Subject filed in Workfront request flows. If removal or disabling not possible at least should have capability to either modify its name or either move it to a different location on the form or within embedded custom form.We have been tackling with this issue from quite a while now, so having this adaptability of “Subject” field would be great feature.