Description - Would like to be able to report on document approval date and time and use as a report prompt Why is this feature important to you - we use specific reports to bundle documents that have been approved within a certain time period - our team then reviews the documents approved in that time period, validates the content and sends them to a team for processing. This process is done three times a week and we use the report prompt to start the current search as the last time the search was done. So if the last time I opened the report was Monday at 3:55PM, when I open the report today I would select Document Approval Date as the report prompt (which this currently exists), between and plug in May 8th, 2023 @ 3:55pm and May 11th, 2023 @ 3:11PM. I would like to be able to see the date and timestamp for this data point within the report, but we can only see the date which does not allow me to verify the data.How would you like the feature to work - I would like the time option added to the document approval date stampCurrent Behaviour - today, can only see document approved May 8th, future would like to see document approved May 8th @ 2:30 PM
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: We want to be able to easily duplicate/copy/move the entire content (assets and pages) between environments found on the same program Use-case: Environment synchronization Current/Experienced Behavior: There is no easy way to duplicate content. The only way to do this now is to move content by doing a code package which is a very painstaking process to do. Improved/Expected Behavior: A method of moving content within the program is available w/o executing any manual steps Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): AEMaCS Customer-name/Organization name: N/A Screenshot (if applicable): N/A Code package (if applicable): N/A
Hello Marketo Community, I wanted to share a friendly suggestion regarding the ordering of segments in the email editor and its preview window, which I believe could enhance the overall user experience. Currently, the order of segments in the email editor corresponds to their numbers in the segmentation. This is typically based on the order in which they were created, which can be confirmed by navigating to Database > Segmentations > First Study Area Option and clicking on the Rules (approved) tab. The list there is the same as the email editor. However, the order in the email editor preview window is reversed, with later numbers appearing at the top and number one at the bottom. While editing the segmentation changes the order for the email editor, the email editor preview dropdown list remains in the original order. To streamline the user experience and simplify navigation, I would like to suggest the following improvements: Make the segmentation order in the Database based on alphabetical order Not the order when they get approved. This would provide a more intuitive and organized view for users, making it easier to locate and manage specific segments. Ensure that the segmentation list in both the email editor and the email editor preview dropdown list remains constant, reflecting any updates made in the segmentation order. This would eliminate any confusion arising from the current discrepancy between the two lists and provide a more seamless experience for users. I believe that implementing these suggestions would further enhance Marketo's user experience and make the segmentation process more efficient and intuitive for all users. I would love to hear your thoughts on this suggestion and any additional feedback the community may have. Thank you for your time and consideration. Looking forward to engaging in further discussions and collaborating on ways to continually improve Marketo. Best regards,Wayne Ying
Description - Allow users to filter their backlogged tickets by assignee on the kanban board view and allow status changes on the backlog view (when tickets are in backlog) to update the column the ticket resides in. For an example, users will be able to assign tickets to themselves on the backlog tab, then change the status of the ticket from "new" to "in progress" and the update reflects the tickets column position on the kanban board tab. Why is this feature important to you - Our agile kanban teams support hundreds of tickets. Scrolling down on the backlog column on the kanban view is tedious since there isn't a way to filter out tickets by assignee on the kanban board. This makes the process very slow and it's extremely easy to lose tickets. More importantly, the team would rather use JIRA which would have multiple negative affects to the workflow. How would you like the feature to work - Team members can assign themselves from the backlog view and either change the status from the backlog view or toggle to their kanban board tab where they'll be able to filter for their name and move the tickets from backlog to "In-Progress" easily. Current Behaviour - Tickets pile up in the kanban board view under backlog and users have to scroll to find their ticket. If they'd rather move to the backlog tab, they can't update the status of the ticket on this view and have it reflect the column the ticket resides in on the kanban board view.
Description - Add an adjustable field within Access Levels to restrict who a user can assign work to. (i.e. Only a users Group or Team or Direct Reports) Why is this feature important to you - Most managers will only assign work to members of their team, so limiting the users they see in the assignments drop down would reduce the chance of accidentally assigning the wrong individual. We have a large organization, and several people have the same first or last name. How would you like the feature to work - I'd like the field to appear either when editing an access level or editing a user. I'd like it to restrict a user from assigning work to someone not in their group, team or a direct report (depending on how you set up the restriction) Current Behavior: When you begin typing in a name, Workfront provides an alphabetized list of recommendations. With a large organization, you have to type in most or all of the name before it will locate the user you're looking for. By enabling this restriction, the recommendations list would be much shorter, making it quicker to assign someone.
Description - Would love to be able to create a view on a report and save that to the Views area in Setup > Interface > ViewsWhy is this feature important to you - Less duplicative workHow would you like the feature to work - If a view was created for a report, I'd love to be able to save that view as a global option (found under Setup > Interface > Views) so that it can be used again without having to re-create. The benefit of creating a view in the reports (or lists) area is that you get to see how the data is presented first before saving, compared to creating a view in the global area and then having to run a report or view a list to ensure it is exactly what you need or want.Current Behaviour - Global views can only be created from the Setup > Interface > Views area.
Description - Would love to have the portfolio and program links in the Project Overview form hyperlinked so that users can click directly to them from their project.Why is this feature important to you - Would help increase user adoption in Portfolios and Programs and give them the 1,000 ft view into campaigns and events.How would you like the feature to work - Portfolio and Program fields would be hyperlinked and within one click the user can get directly to that object.Current Behaviour - Today, you have to copy/paste or remember the Portfolio or Program name that the project is tagged to. So you are going to Project Details > Overview > Main Menu > Portfolios or Programs > in page search > opening that Portfolio or Program.
I'm still not clear why the Federation ID field in Workfront is case sensitive. If there's not a good reason for this, can we someday make them not case sensitive please?
Description -Why is this feature important to you - I'd like to know when a resource is starting a task. How would you like the feature to work - If the resource changes the task status from NEW to IN PROGRESS, that triggers an email to me, the Project Owner. Current Behaviour - No such email notification is currently configured.
Background: SMS campaign deployed at 10PM instead of 10AM. There were messages received past midnight. This was human error and was not caught in time to do any modification to the deployment time.Issue: There were messages received past midnight. Would like to apply a capability to not have any SMS messages to deploy after a certain time frame, but currently, Marketo does not have this capability. Recommended Solution: If there is a way that Marketo can have the ability to hard code something to block any/all text message deployments outside of a certain time frame / time zone (ie. No SMS message campaigns to deploy after 9PM).
Description -When right clicking and trending a metric, please offer the ability to search for anomalies on the trended metric. Why is this feature important to you - Before changes to anomaly detection a few months ago, this was available. Now it takes several steps to replicate. Re-enabling this would make it much easier to drill down into various dimensions to spot key drivers for anomalies and investigating changes in traffic. How would you like the feature to work -For any trended data visualization, enable the Anomalies option. Current Behavior -When selecting a value and trending, the Anomalies option is greyed out. For example, last 30 days by marketing channel. Selecting top channel value, right clicking and selecting trend. The line chart is displayed and the chart has show anomalies checked, but anomalies are not calculated. Clicking on the freeform table, the Anomalies option is greyed out since there's no time metric in the breakout. As a workaround, I can find the channel(s) that I'm interested in, drop as filters under the metric, then replaced channels with day, select the column(s) and enable anomalies. However, when reviewing several anomalies or investigating traffic this is inefficient.
Now that you've made it possible to have panels individually created at the Report Suite level, I would submit to you that it would be highly advantageous to also be able to add a Segment at the VISUALIZATION level instead of having to insert into the table itself. Just like we're able to drag a segment into a Panel, we should be able to drag segments into the top section of a Visualization, too.This gives us the ability to have control over INDIVIDUAL visualization data and not have to keep building separate panels because of ONE specific segment. I can't be the only analyst out there thinking the same thing. Thanks in advance!Jeff Bloomer | KPF - Manager, Digital Analytics
Description - Sometimes I create multiple panels for experiments and one is for historical information (last 3 months) and the rest are to measure the experiences. If I use "apply to all panels", it will change the historical one too, and I don't want that.Why is this feature important to you - It would save time and ease frustrationHow would you like the feature to work - I would like to either lock a panel's dates or group panels so that I could "apply to all in the group"Current Behavior - It is either all or none with panels.
Verbesserungsvorschlag – Zusammenfassung: Increase usability of text asset editor in AEM Forms by adding colors Use Case: Text asset editing and data field handing in AEM forms Derzeitiges/erlebtes Verhalten: Fields within text assets can have two different ways of behavior - user can add data or not. For a template author no way exists to distinguish the elements as both looks same Verbessertes/erwartetes Verhalten: Given that a text asset is edited and fields out of a data dictionary will be added When the field is added as "Locked", the field will appear in the text asset with red highlight color When the field is added as "Open" the field will appear in the text asset with green highlight color Umgebungsdetails (AEM-Version/Service Pack, ggf. andere Besonderheiten): AEM Forms 6.5.7 with compatibilty package Kundenname/Organisationsname: Deutsche Bank Screenshot (falls zutreffend): Code-Paket (falls zutreffend):
We would love if the proofing tool could support internal PDF reference links that are built within the initial PDF rather than converting it to a flat image. For instance, if a large manual/guide is uploaded with a table of contents that has page numbers that link to other pages, or if there are "jump to page 5" or "return to contents" type links that would work in the actual PDF, that these links would work within the proof viewer also. Currently our reviewers have to download and open the PDF separately to test all of the PDF reference links, then go back into the proofing tool to comment things like "link does not go to proper page" or "link is broken", etc. This takes extra time and creates room for error. Current behavior is that the proofing tool only supports clicking links to external sites (like if there is a link for www.testwebsite.com, you can click that link within the proofing tool), but if you click links that move you to different parts of a PDF (like "jump to Table of Contents"), they are no longer clickable and become just a flat image. We would like these links to still be active and to move you to the proper page/location within the proofing tool. Thank you!
Do not receive a Save warning when navigating away from the Portfolio Optimizer page
We have a lot of teams that don't convert all of their issues to projects, so it's difficult for them to see what work is unassigned as issues are not included in this part of the Workload Balancer. This does not allow for the resource manager to consider the team's availability on the same page that they are assigning the issues.
Description - We would like the ability to set the request type at a queue topic level, to enable users to receive work as issues or tasks via the same queue.Why is this feature important to you - The queue topic asks you to define the request type, but this doesn't actually work other than just categorising it. We have queues where some users want to work in agile and therefore need work delivered as an issue. Other users receiving work want to work with tasks but even though all queue settings have been put in place, they receive work as an issue and have to manually convert it.How would you like the feature to work - Queue topic request type should an additional way to define and deliver the correct request format to a user without having to convert it. Multi-functional queues where users can work in standard or agile from the same queue, and settings can be applied to ensure they get the work in desired format. Current Behaviour - Users have to manually convert the issue to a task.
I would like to suggest the addition of a new functionality to record issues on the Portfolio/Program page.Currently, there are workarounds for recording Portfolio level risks/issues, but there is no direct way to register them on the same page. This could be a valuable addition for portfolio managers who want to register risks and issues that are not specific to a particular project, but rather a higher-level concern.This feature would enhance the program and portfolio management capabilities and visibility of such higher-level risks/issues.
Description - It would be great if within Launch we could apply tags to rules and data elements to categorise. We have to get creative with naming conventions to describe what a rule does and what is firing within it. If I could tag a rule with "google ads" and filter all the rules where that tag exists, I can easily edit a pixel firing on those rules. Right now, I have to write it in the name or click into every rule. Other tag managers have this simple UX feature. Why is this feature important to you - It helps us organise our implementation, and saves a lot of time. QoL function. How would you like the feature to work - Explained in the description. Current Behaviour - As above - naming conventions have to do all of the heavy lifting.
I'm referring to the functionality outlined here: Configure system updates & System-tracked updates Currently:When making changes to a Project template there is no indication in the update stream of changes made. Additionally there are no options to add template specific fields to the update stream. This means that there are very few ways to identify when and what changes were made to a project template. If a user mistakenly removes a predecessor from a task or modifies the assignments we have no way of knowing. What I would like to see:It would greatly improve project management and troubleshooting if changes made at the project template level were tracked in the update stream on the template. Additionally, it would be helpful to have the ability to add template specific fields in the update stream. This would make identifying the source of timeline related issues easier by giving some insight on when changes were made to the template. As a side note: I also think it would be great to have the option to track changes to predecessors in the update stream as well.
I'd love the ability to permission people/roles from seeing previous versions of a proof in Workfront Proof. For example, we start routing a proof internally and it goes through several rounds of proofing. Now it's ready for the client to see it. I'd love to send the most recent approved version to the client for review but don't want them to have access to the previous versions. They mark that up, edits are made, another couple rounds of internal review and then the approved version goes back to client. At that point they only have access to the versions of the proof they were a part of. Why is this feature important to me? This would allow us to have one document that spans the entire life of the project but would prevent clients from seeing all of the back and forth that happened to get that piece approved. To accomplish this in the current state we have to create a clean document to send over for client review. When we go that route we are left with 2 unappealing options: 1. Have multiple documents for the same deliverable or 2. Someone has to transfer all of the client markups back to the original document's proof.
Description - Would like to have the ability to 'sort' report data, specifically data from a field that allows for more than 1 selection so that further excel work could be streamlined. Why is this feature important to you - This is important for our budgeting system that we built in Workfront. The data captured in Workfront is exported to excel frequently and further looked at/put into pivot tables, charts, etc. How would you like the feature to work - To have an "advanced option" in that column of data to sort the data in a specific order, or even order of how the field values are displayed in the field would be great. Example: we have apple, orange, banana, peach and plum as field values. Adam selects apple and plum and his data shows as Apple, Plum. Lucy select apple, orange, banana and her data shows as Banana, Orange and Apple. While looking at Adam and Lucy's data in our report, Apple is not aligned as the first option therefore when exporting to excel it makes it more difficult to continue reviewing the data.Current Behaviour - Workfront currently displays the data in a report in the order it was selected by the user.
Description -The new Workfront Filter experience sorts filters by creation date of the filter which is not helpful. The filter tool used to automatically alphabetize filters within the filter list which was much more useful. I understand that one can now drag and drop filter ordering around but this is not very useful and simply causes more work. When one has a filter list of 100 plus filters which gets used regularly (By Administrator) dragging and dropping is not an idea feature. Why is this feature important to you -It is more intuitive than the current Beta version of the new filter experience and saves time. How would you like the feature to work -I would like to see filters auto alphabetize. Drag and drop can still exist but at least alphabetize the filter from the start. Current Behavior-All new filters simply are appended to the top of the filter list
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: The AEM Content Fragment UI should allow users to configure columns based on their preferences, making it easier to display the desired information in a more accessible format. Use-case: In the view settings menu or directly in the table results, we should be able to customize column options based on the available fields in the Content Fragments. Current/Experienced Behavior: In the settings (Customize Table), we can only select a few generic fields. Improved/Expected Behavior: Our goal is to be able to select any available fields in the Content Fragment (configurable) such as the variations, the profile owner, the profile image, the title, the description, the social media profiles, the country, the city, the job type, and the skills. We want to display the selected fields in separate columns according to our preferences. Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): AEM as a Cloud Service Customer-name/Organization name: Accenture Screenshot (if applicable): Current options for "Customize table" Code package (if applicable):
Already have an account? Login
No account yet? Create an account
Enter your E-mail address. We'll send you an e-mail with instructions to reset your password.
