Build better products with our product team
We have several instances where one of our Planners who did not create a proof and is not a reviewer will view a proof. A "Workfront" stage is automatically created with that user added to it. The user has to remove that stage or else they will begin to receive emails and notifications related to that proof which results in unnecessary and irrelevant emails and notifications. They cannot turn those notifications off because they need to receive them for proofs they are actually on.We need a way to disable the automatic creation of the "Workfront" proof when a user not on the proof views it.
There is a Seed List feature in AJO when it comes to use of Seed Lists, but that needs to be further developed. Today the Seed List is configured on the email surface. That means that you cant decide if you want to use it or not, when the surface is used. F ex if you have a marketing surface and you use that surface for "all" your emails, like onboarding, sales and Newsletters. Whatever you are sending with that surface is using the Seed List even it is wanted or not. A use case is it Customer service wants to know what has been sent out in a mass sending, like a Newsletter. Then the Seed List works great. But it you then use the same surface for your onboarding activities, customer service gets a copy of each and every single email that runs through the onboarding prosses. Our ideas is if you can decide from the email node configuration if you want to use a Seed List or not. And if you also could select from a list over different Seed Lists, who you wanted to use, this would be great. Then you have the option if you want to use a Seed List for this specific email or not, regardless of surface, and you could also use different list for different emails, in the same Journey.
Description - The derived fields UI to grab and persist a URL query parameter, for instance UTM parameters like "utm_source", "utm_medium", etc. seems rather counterintuitive, at least I have not managed to set it up successfully to assign a utm_source grabbed on pageA to pageB. Which functions to use is a little unclear, and setting the persistence does not seem to work as expected. From what I have read, you will somehow need to check if the query param is set on pageB and if not, return the previous value? It would be amazing if a working approach could somehow be baked into CJA derived fields function templates and call it something like "Get and persist query parameter" or whatever. Why is this feature important to you - The UI should be as simple as possible and self explanatory. If there are multiple steps needed to come to a result, it would help to provide guidance or a template to avoid making "beginner" mistakes. How would you like the feature to work - Add a function template to derived fields Current Behaviour - Derived field documentation is still sparse, persistence settings seem to not be working as expected, order of steps to achieve something as basic as storing a value across multiple page views is not clear.
Our PMs would like to have the ability to edit the Template field on a project. Sometimes they need to switch out the template that's used via the Attach Template feature (because they don't have permission to delete the project and re-create it with a new template); however, the project relationship doesn't reflect this. This causes inaccurate reporting in some cases - when the project duration is compared to the template duration, for example.
For most normal dimensions you can only generate dynamic columns for the top 5 items. 5 is a very small number (I needed 8 the other day and was stuck!) - is there any chance of increasing this? If there are performance worries, even a small increase to 10 or 20 would be very useful! The feature can be seen here: Dynamic Columns In Analysis Workspace Freeform Tables | Adobe Analytics - YouTube
To be able to export from the Updates TabWe are archiving projects, and this is one more piece of project informationTo Export in PDF format (landscape or portrait)Current there is no option.
Description -the document upload notification email to say what folder the document was uploaded to. It would be nice to see that the document was uploaded to the "internal review" folder (in our case) and the project status doesn't need to change without having to go into the job and look each time. Why is this feature important to you -This would save our traffic team a lot of time. We wouldn't need to go into the project only to see that there is no action required from us yet. How would you like the feature to work -the document upload notification email to say what folder the document was uploaded to. Current Behavior - The notification email just says a document was uploaded to the job. I have to go in to the job and click to several different screens to see what folder its in to know what action I need to take.
One of my biggest issues when it comes to coding landing pages/ emails is the white screen that plagues the Marketo Designer. It would be really cool to add the option to switch on "dark mode" to make coding easier as the black screen helps with coloring and finding/fixing errors. I'm not entirely sure if this already is a feature - but I haven't been able to find it and I think it would be an awesome asset to add for people who tend to code a lot and don't have the resources outside of Marketo. What do you guys think?
When developing email templates that work with both light and dark mode, using <picture> and <source> tags with a fallback <img> inside it is a clean way to set both light and dark mode images without having to assign the image a conditional media query show/hide via CSS. However, the TinyMCE editor today will strip this markup rather than allow it to be in editable areas. Can this please be updated to no longer have this behavior?
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: display number on assets in list view Use-case: to have an easy way to know how many asset we select Current/Experienced Behavior: today we have a clear view of the total amount of assets in list view, but if we need to select only 35 assets (because of limitation on other flows for ex) then it's quite complex to do Improved/Expected Behavior: if in each line we have the number of line, then it's easier to do the selection Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): display number on assets in list view Customer-name/Organization name: Louis Vuitton Screenshot (if applicable): Code package (if applicable):
Description Love the Company Folder and the ability to share a group of projects across your organization, but want to potentially share only relevant projects for users and / or want to hide non-relevant templates and folders? Current state, the Company Folder is an all-or-nothing holding ground for placing reports and enforcing automatic sharing privileges. However, there are situations where you want only a certain team or group of individuals (maybe even product profile) to access a certain folder or even see that folder. I'm proposing the idea of allowing users to create a "Shared Folder" that will let you set-up your own sharing permission that allows you to create a project and move to the folder and all members of the group will be able to access, but will not have to give carte blanche access to all members of your company. Why is this feature important to you I often have a team of core people I work with for certain projects or reporting focuses that allow for many reports to get created, or I have a list of 5-6 people who NEED to be shared a report, but it has to be reviewed and approved internally before it is shared out, and putting it into the company folder before it is ready is not an acceptable option. How would you like the feature to work Ideally, I would like the folder when selected on the landing page and the blue selection bar appears, it would have similar options to selecting a project, to "share", "rename", "pin", or "tag". And inside the "Share" menu, you could manage the permissions for the folder similar to the pop-up menu that exists for projects: "Edit Sharing Access" could be used for determining who has the ability control access permissions for the folder, "Edit Project Access" would allow users to determine who could edit the projects inside the folder or move projects inside the folder, and "View Project Only" would allow users to be added to the folder to view reporting, but unable to edit (perhaps great for executives or others who you want to give visibility without risking a report getting unintentionally modified). It could also be more complicated, and move to using product profiles if supporting this level of granularity inside the landing page wouldn't be possible, but the idea of allowing users to have folder permissions for storing their projects similar to the concept of Dropbox, Box, OneDrive shared folders is the core of the idea.
The recent calendar look/feel upgrade from May 2025 no longer allows multiple entries (more than 2) from displaying for each date. Instead, the user needs to click on the "more" option which appears on any date with more than 2 entries. The text is light grey, blends in with the background, and is easy to miss. It's causing confusion among our users who do not see their entry and are unaware of the "more" functionality. We would like the option in Setup to turn off "more" and simply display all the entries, which was the standard prior to the May 2025 update.
DescriptionWe have dozens of Roles, and hundreds of Teams, Reports, and Dashboards. The only tool that is built into Workfront to help us document and govern these objects is the Description field. The absence of custom parameters on these objects is limiting in what and how we are able to document their usage.We would like to attach custom forms on these object types so we can spend less time tracking down all the people and places throughout our instance that are impacted by updates to these objects.This was enabled last year for other objects like Groups and Billing Records. The efficiencies gained by those enhancements should be further expanded to these additional object types. Why is this feature important to youIt is challenging to track and document governance-related details on these objects because we have only the description field to do so, and that field is exposed to all users. How would you like the feature to workFor Teams, Roles, Reports, and Dashboards, we would like to attach custom forms that we would design to help us in maintaining and governing those objects. Current BehaviourWe have only the Description field to add all details about these objects, so are constrained by space, format, and visibility to users.We have explored using Fusion to seed a collection of Projects and Tasks to add a lot of detail and metadata about these objects, but its tedious to maintain and isn't easily seen when someone is making updates to one of these objects.
Description - It would be extremely helpful to have the ability to remove individuals from the Workload Balancer tab of a Workfront project once they are no longer assigned to any tasks. Why is this feature important to you -This creates unnecessary clutter and makes it harder to focus on the actual project team members who are actively contributing to the work. Having a way to automatically or manually remove unassigned users would streamline resource planning and ensure that only relevant team members are visible when reviewing project resourcing. How would you like the feature to work - View Description. Current Behaviour - Currently, even after reassigning a user's tasks to another user or job role, their name still appears in the Workload Balancer.
Description - We would like the ability to upload a structured document (e.g., Word, PDF, linked SharePoint file) to a Workfront object (like a tactic or project) and have Workfront’s AI extract key data points and populate designated custom form fields. This would streamline the setup of records that rely on structured metadata already captured in offline templates. Why is this feature important to you - This functionality would eliminate redundant manual entry and improve data consistency across Workfront objects. It is especially important for our marketing team, which uses Workfront tactics to manage a content inventory. Each tactic has structured metadata that already exists in a completed Word template. Currently, this information must be copied and pasted into custom form fields, which is time-consuming and error-prone. How would you like the feature to work -Allow users to upload a structured document (e.g., .docx or .pdf) to a project, task, or tacticWorkfront AI parses the document and suggests values for mapped custom form fieldsAdmins can define mapping rules for which text fields in a document align to which custom form fieldsThe user reviews and accepts or edits the extracted field values before savingOptionally, allow mapping to vary by object type or custom form template Current Behaviour - Currently, documents can be uploaded or linked to Workfront objects, but there is no functionality to extract content from those documents and apply it to custom form fields. All structured data must be manually transcribed from the uploaded file into Workfront forms.
It would be great to be able automatically un-sync a program from a SFDC campaign when the program is archived.
Description - only proof approvals are currently sorted by the deadline set within the my approvals widget. Confusion with users thinking there is not anything for them to approve because the urgent ones are sitting on the last page of the widgetWhy is this feature important to you - enable users to better manage their assigned approvals directly from the home pageHow would you like the feature to work - task and document approvals are sorted by the deadline that is set, enabling users to see the most urgent approval on the first page of the widgetCurrent Behaviour - document approvals appearing within the my approvals widget sorted by entry date
Description -Why is this feature important to you - in most cases UPSERT flag is required for a dataset. the option to enable upsert flag can be done only through API. it will be good if we have this option in UI.How would you like the feature to work - enabling UPSERT flag in UI as a toggle button.Current Behaviour - currently UPSERT flag can be enabled only through API.
Description - We would like a more intuitive way for requestors to clear out data in irrelevant form fields when they change their selections in a request form. Why is this feature important to you - We want to eliminate confusion for requestors and prevent errors in automated processes and reporting. Currently, our Fusion scenario triggers messages based on a calculated field, and retained data from previously selected options can cause false positives. Requestors often believe they’ve submitted the request correctly, unaware that hidden fields still contain outdated data. How would you like the feature to work - When a requestor unselects an option, any data entered in fields associated with that option’s conditional logic should be automatically cleared. This would ensure that only relevant data is retained and reduce the risk of errors caused by hidden, outdated inputs. Current Behaviour - Our request intake form uses extensive conditional logic. Occasionally, a requestor will change their selection mid-submission or copy a previous request and modify it. When they deselect an option, the associated fields are hidden—but the data within them remains. This retained data can interfere with calculated fields and downstream automation, leading to confusion and incorrect outputs. I refer to this issue as the “ghost of a previous deliverable.” Despite efforts to educate requestors, many find it unintuitive that hidden fields still retain data. I’ve attached a tutorial video I created a couple years ago to demonstrate this behavior.
Currently, Workfront calendars lack the "Run this report with the Access Rights of" setting that exists in Workfront Reports. Without this feature, every user must be granted access to every relevant project in order to view the calendar. It would be extremely beneficial if Workfront Calendars could adopt the same access rights as Reports. Calendars offer a more intuitive and visual way to communicate timelines compared to reports. For use cases like tracking launch dates across multiple teams and departments, calendars provide a clearer, more accessible view that supports better planning and coordination. Our department—and the company as a whole—heavily relies on Workfront calendars for their visual clarity and ease of use. We've built department-wide launch calendars to track email deployments and web production go-live dates. I spoke with a support representative today who confirmed that this feature previously existed. I recall this as well—it was a key reason we initially built out launch calendars. It's frustrating that the functionality has been removed, as it significantly limits the usability of calendars across teams. Can we explore bringing this feature back?
I would like the ability display a field solely on whether a previous fields was filled in. For eample I have a situation where I need to enter in up to 5 supplier names but only want the next supplier field to appear if the previous was entered.
Description - the current Web SDK "set-consent" behaves a little unexpected in different situations, leading to unwanted results, whereas a the legacy Visitor ID service behaved differently. Examples: A) A new visitor denies cookies. With the Visitor ID service, you would've just denied the consent categories, mapped to the Adobe tools without having any whatsoever cookie written. With the Web SDK however, if you send a general "opt out" through the "set-consent" action, two things happen "kndctr" cookies are set (!) if the company has a RT-CDP license, a pseudonymous profile is created (correct me if am wrong!) with the consent preferences attached to it In my opinion, none of the two above make sense, and cookies written lead to potential legal problems. Now, I am a seasoned Launch developer and have a workaround that involves local storage and some other constructs to make sure the "set-consent" rule only triggers (and writes cookies and creates a profile), when it is needed. I am wondering what happened to the super simple approach with the old Adobe optIn API. Why is this feature important to you - ease of use, legal compliance and cost control. If I don't consent, why does the Edge network return cookies. And when I am a new visitor without consent, why create a profile? How would you like the feature to work - Web SDK should send a set-consent call if a user previously consented and changed his settings e.g., now opts out. a user gives consent to be tracked ("collect") Web SDK should NOT send a set-consent call if the user has never consented and rejected all consent categories, resp. the "collect" category Current Behaviour - opt out with cookies stored on client side and needed workaround in place to disable Adobe tools and functionalities that were automatically handled through the Visitor ID Service in the past.
Description - Apply attribution models to Data Warehouse exportsWhy is this feature important to you - So that we have an ability to automatically export approved data to vendors with the appropriate attribution in view.How would you like the feature to work - Be able to do attribution on metrics in Data Warehouse.Current Behaviour - You can only use Last Touch Channel as a dimension (with no ability to manipulate attribution window per report) and no metrics can be attributed.
Since the prehistory... In Adobe Analytics the possibility of sorting by dimension is something impossible.Now we have workspace and I really dream to have it.In freeform table we can sort by value we have in columns but not by value we have in rows. Please let's make it !! There are tons of reason why we need it. Try to think about a report where I'd like to have data sorted by Category of products, Zip codes, Order Id, Attributes of product...
Description - Ability to create segment based on calculated metrics Why is this feature important to you - Sometimes a calculated metrics need to be used to get a more accurate segment How would you like the feature to work - In my case, I created a metrics of revenue with tax, which added 2 existing metrics of revenue and tax. I then would like to create a segment of visits that meet a threshold of the calculated metrics. Current Behaviour - Calculated metrics cannot be used in segment creation.
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.
