Build better products with our product team
Current problemMy organisation uses centrally managed Analysis Workspace projects that are shared with a large population of Adobe Analytics users. These projects are commonly shared with broad product-profile groups using Edit copy, allowing users to work from a governed starting point without changing the original project.Within the Share dialogue, there is a checkbox labelled “Set as landing page for recipients”.If a project is shared with a large product-profile group, selecting this option and clicking Update can make that project the default landing page for every recipient in the group.This is a potentially high-impact action, but it is presented as a standard checkbox alongside lower-impact project-sharing settings. The interface does not provide a prominent warning explaining the scale of the change, clearly confirm which users will be affected, or offer an effective organisation-level method of reversing the action. Why this creates a governance riskIn a large organisation, Analytics users perform different roles and use different Analysis Workspace projects. A single workspace is therefore unlikely to be an appropriate landing page for every user.The feature itself can be useful where an organisation deliberately wants to give a specific audience a common landing page. However, when a workspace is shared with a broad product-profile group, the same setting can accidentally change the experience for hundreds or potentially thousands of users.Users can individually change their own landing-page preference after the change has been applied. However, requiring every affected user to correct the setting individually is not an efficient or scalable recovery mechanism. It may also generate avoidable user confusion, support requests and internal communications.The current design therefore creates an imbalance:One project owner can apply the change to a large recipient group in a single action. Each affected recipient may then need to correct the change individually. The project owner or Analytics administrator does not appear to have an equivalent central action to restore the normal Projects list landing page for everyone affected. You cannot untick the box once the feature has been ticked and updated, therefore there is no clear way to reverse the previously applied landing-page change.This is particularly risky for organisations using centrally managed workspace projects and broad product-profile groups to support governed self-service analytics. Suggested improvements1. Add a high-impact confirmation dialogueWhen Set as landing page for recipients is selected, Adobe Analytics should display a confirmation dialogue before applying the change.2. Introduce permission-based access to the featureAdobe should provide a dedicated permission such as: “Manage landing pages for other users”Analytics administrators could control which users or product profiles receive this permission through the Adobe Admin Console.3. Provide an organisation-level reset optionAdministrators should be able to centrally restore the default landing page for affected users.4. Make the setting a reversible stateThe option should behave as a genuine on/off setting rather than as a one-time action.If a project is currently assigned as the landing page for a selected group, the sharing dialogue should show that state clearly. Turning the setting off should remove the central assignment for the same recipients.5. Protect existing personal preferencesWhere possible, Adobe should provide a choice between:Set the project as the landing page for all selected recipients Set the project only for recipients without an existing preference Do not overwrite user-selected landing pagesThis would allow organisations to provide a helpful default without overriding deliberate choices made by experienced users. Expected benefitThese improvements would preserve the usefulness of Set as landing page for recipients while reducing the risk of an accidental large-scale change.They would provide:Better governance for centrally managed workspace environments Clearer awareness of the impact before a change is applied Appropriate access control for a high-impact capability Protection for individual user preferences A scalable recovery process Fewer avoidable support requests and user communicationsMost importantly, the administrative effort required to reverse a landing-page change would be proportionate to how easily the original change can be applied. Current workaroundWe identified a workaround that can reset the landing page for the affected recipients:Create a copy of a centrally shared Analysis Workspace project. Share that copied project with the affected user group. Select Set as landing page for recipients and apply the change. Delete the copied project.Once the copied project is deleted, the assigned landing page is no longer available and the recipients’ landing page is reset.Although this provides a possible recovery route, it is not an appropriate long-term solution
A helpful and efficient update that would help reduce the number of fusion scenario runs and modules needed after an Adobe Workfront Watch Event (instant) would be simply to include numberOfChildren as an Event Filter option for Task events webhook configuration. We are looking to drive automation once a task status changes but looking to limit the run on only actual tasks, not parent tasks. We are able to work around but see double the number of runs necessary and need to add extra modules to read the task after the webhook. This would be similar to this idea where the option to filter by that field for task objects: Fusion Watch module for a task canStart update | Community
We used to be able to right-click on the sidebar area to the left of the project info. 'Tasks, Documents, Project Details, etc.' could be right-clicked and have opened in a new tab/window. A few montsh ago the UI team changed that option and right-clicking those is no longer available. I’m hoping there's a way to bring that back as it was REALLY helpful when trying to see two different sections of the project quickly. The removal of the right-click functionality on the project left panel navigation items is a product design change that was made as part of a platform update. I’d love for it to be brought back as an easier part of the Workfront workflows.
We’re going through a taxonomy/metadata exercise to map our organization’s taxonomy across our enterprise with Workfront and AEM.While this page is available: https://developer.adobe.com/workfront/api-explorer/You can’t export the fields or the data.This would be nice to have when mapping and integrating.
Hi,We have disabled the "Schedule All Audiences" option in our AEP Production sandbox and currently manage audience evaluation schedules using the Tags feature. This allows us to run segment evaluations at different times based on business requirements. For example:Daily tagged audiences are scheduled at 12 PM Daily_Edge tagged audiences are scheduled at 9 PMThis approach is being used for both batch and Edge audiences.I was wondering if there is an option, or if there are plans to introduce one, that would allow "Schedule All Audiences" to be enabled only for Edge audiences while keeping batch audience scheduling controlled through tags.The rationale is that, if Edge audiences could be automatically evaluated whenever profile data is ingested, the Edge audience memberships would remain up to date without requiring a scheduled segment evaluation run. This could help reduce operational overhead and improve audience freshness for Edge use cases.I understand that audiences containing event-based criteria are evaluated immediately when qualifying events occur. My question is specifically related to profile attribute-based Edge audiences and whether they can be automatically refreshed upon profile updates without relying on scheduled evaluations.
My organization uses Workfront Planning to manage our Enterprise Strategic Plan. Initially, users submit very early stage Strategic Plan Requests for initial review. If it is determined by leadership that it aligns with the organization's strategic goals, they are approved to begin discovery. The Request itself is not approved at this time, it is just moved to a different status, indicating they can move forward with discovery. Once discovery is complete, it is reviewed again, and only then if approved does it move over to Workfront Proper to become a full project.This discovery could take years in some cases, and is occurring while the item is still a Request in Planning. We need a way for these users to track their time contributed to the discovery process.
My organization uses Workfront Planning to manage our Enterprise Strategic Plan. Through the use of structured taxonomies, we’re able to create a timeline view that allows for the breakdown Strategic Theme -> Strategic Sub-Theme -> Strategic Statements -> Projects, showing where each project falls on the timeline that impacts its associated strategy.We'd like to break it down a step further and be able to expand each Project associated with a Strategic Statement within that timeline view to show the Milestones within the Project, or specifically labeled Parent Tasks, allowing teams to view where each phase of any given Initiative then falls within the overall project timeline all in one view.Currently we're unable to do so as the only available Workfront Object Types to connect to in Planning are Project, Portfolio, Program, Company, Group and Original Request.
Hello,When adding an audience to an Adobe Journey Optimizer campaign, the audience-selection window displays all available audiences in a single flat list. Users can search or apply filters and tags, but they cannot browse the folder structure already available in the Audiences workspace.Why is this feature important?For organizations managing hundreds or thousands of audiences, a flat list is difficult and inefficient to navigate. Audience folders are commonly used to organize audiences by market, business unit, campaign type, environment, or use case.Without folder navigation, users must remember exact audience names or rely on tags, which may not always be applied consistently. This slows down campaign creation and increases the risk of selecting the wrong audience.How should the feature work?The AJO campaign audience selector should display the same folder hierarchy available in the Audiences workspace. Users should be able to:Browse and expand audience folders. See their current folder location. Search or filter within a selected folder. Search across all folders when required. Select an audience directly from the folder view.The existing tags and filters should remain available as complementary options.Expected benefitThis enhancement would provide a more consistent user experience, reduce audience-selection errors, improve campaign setup efficiency, and make audience management more scalable for organizations with large audience libraries.
Right now, we can only export meta data on a folder level. This is impractical if you need to edit only meta data for 30 assets, but then wait hours for a folder meta data report because there are 5k assets in a folder. And no, smaller folder is not an option here. So what would be preferrable is that you simply select any assets you want and click “export metadata”. The upload of meta data should support this, so that you can add the meta data e.g. for the top folder and it will be applied to all assets in the csv, regardless of their sub folder location (not tested in current environment - maybe this works already?).
Currently, the meta data export csv does not contain the asset ID. This is a real problem because the asset ID (“urn:aaid:aem:”) is the unique identifier and with this ID, you can easily compare, consolidate or edit meta data import sheets or locate a specific asset in the csv, even if some assets have identical titles etc.. This is a feature that I would expect of ANY DAM, not a nice to have, but a must-have. Support asked me to send in an idea, but I feel the product is lacking a standard feature here.
Hello! We would like to propose that when using a Workflow Template for Proofing that the V2 (Version 2) of that document would follow the deadline days and time as formatted in the initial template set up. Thank you!
I recommend that the feature that automatically auto tags images in a document is disabled for every user. The tagging can/should be manually done with the ai generated text as an option, not a default setting.I have an abstract image in my template that I send to clients. If I forget to disable the auto tagging, then the client will read a caption that suggests I am sending them a nude image. There is no figure in the graphic. There is no suggestion of a figure in the graphic, but Ai suggest that there is, and it confuses my clients. Even if it says that it is an “Ai generated caption”, my clients read it as something I, myself, inserted into their document. I have turned it off. I have done it multiple times, successfully. However, I do not love that it is my sole responsibility to work around a program every single time I send out a document.
It would be great to create a date range which is relative to the Date Ranges selected in the Panel. Right now, I can only visualize a fixed date range for a previous reporting period. Example: I create a report with last week as previous comparing period. When I change the Date Ranges in the Panel (e.g. last quarter) it will still compare the whole last quarter with last week.
There is an important option missing in the date rage panel.We can select the current period but not the selected period of the workspace. So it's not possible to create dynamic comparison to the current time range users set in the workspace.In other words we absolutely need these options:- current day- current week- current month- current quarter- current year- current date range
Requested EnhancementsPlease consider expanding the Activity Revisions API to include more complete audit information, such as:What exactly changed in each revision Who made the change When the change occurred Previous value and new value for changed fields Change type or action performed, such as create, edit, approve, deactivate, archive, or schedule update Workspace, property, or environment context where applicableWhy This MattersMore comprehensive revision history would significantly improve:Audit readiness Troubleshooting and incident analysis Operational transparency Change tracking across teams Governance and compliance reviewToday, it is difficult to fully understand the history of an activity and determine the precise sequence of updates made over time. Expanded revision details would make the API much more useful for enterprise activity management.Request to AdobeWe would appreciate it if this enhancement request could be shared with the Adobe Target product team for consideration.Thank you for your time and support. We would appreciate any updates on whether this request can be added to the product roadmap.
It is a huge inefficiency that we cannot bulk edit like items on template tasks in multiple templates. For example, I want to bulk edit a value on the same task custom form in multiple template tasks/across multiple templates. I pull all of the tasks in a template task report, select the several I want to change, all of which have the same task custom form, and you cannot do this. You get the error below. You can bulk edit tasks across projects, why can we not bulk edit tasks across multiple templates?
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: Content Hub Display Use-case: Current/Experienced Behavior: Content Hub Display Labels on Filters Improved/Expected Behavior: The filter list in Content Hub currently shows technical values instead of display labels. Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): Customer-name/Organization name: Screenshot (if applicable): Code package (if applicable):
When creating a report, you have the Report Default view that is naturally created which works great for a lot of specific reports, but we find creating reporting for multiple teams challenging as they want to see different data elements (different columns) based on their role; looking for options to avoid creating multiple reports for basically the same thing and also increase the ease of using reports without having to team users which views go with which reports and also which ones simply are used potentially in project list views or somewhere else. Idea: Have the ability to create or associate specific views (columns/formatting) and tag them to a report. Ideally, this would be available in a section on top with predefined reporting views that users can quickly navigate between. Bonus: Have the option to select a view based off simple rules such as If TeamID = Leader then present the Leadership view (configured when creating the report!)
Hi Everyone! I have set up a template using the new email builder. I made sure it looks good in both light mode and dark mode. However, when we use that template to create an actual email asset, the dark mode does not keep the styling that we originally dictated once we paste in new content. Sometimes I can paste in content and dark mode displays as I’ve set it to, but sometimes I paste in content and it just completely messes up dark mode. I have tried copying/pasting directly from the Excel file with the content. I’ve tried copying and selecting “paste and match style” to keep the style of the Marketo text box I’m pasting into. I’ve also tried copying/pasting into Sublime to strip the formatting, then copying/pasting from Sublime into Marketo. None of these processes made a difference. Dark mode always displays incorrectly. We shouldn’t have to (and it’s not sustainable to) re-style the dark mode for every single email. If there is a text block that’s already been styled in both light and dark mode in the email template, that styling should carry through even if we paste in new content. Thank you!
The standard endpoints used to export results do not support returning the specific test variant details for A/B-tested emails. When an email is part of an A/B test, the API returns the generic value "Whole Emails Test."This value identifies that the email belongs to an A/B test group, but it does not indicate whether the email was Variant A or Variant B. As a result, the specific variant cannot be determined using the results.I understand that this information is important for your use case. However, at the moment, we do not have an API endpoint that can identify whether an email belongs to Variant A or Variant B.
We would like to be able to determine how many times a webhook is called in past 30/60/90 days. We can get the people that were affected by the webhook, but because the webhook could process more than one person, the two are not equal. We want to see this to determine how frequently these webhooks are being called.
It’s not ideal to have to type “confirm” each time you want to update a field value. For some fields we have 20+ values that need to be updated. It would be better to unlock all of the values for a field after confirming once.Also, the process of confirming itself is not intuitive. It’s not obvious that you need to type “confirm” instead of the updated value itself. It would be better to have a “Confirm” button.
Dear Adobe Team,we are currently in transition from AA to CJA and are migration a ton of workspace to from AA to CJA.However the process is currently not really perfect as only CJA Admins can be chosen as Owner of the dashboard and its elements.We are aware of the workaround of first put the ownership on an admin. transfer the workspace and then later use Asset Transfer in CJA to set the real owner of the workspace but this is problematic and error prone as identifying all assets which ownership should also change is a lot of manual work.i guess that is also a problem for other admins that are in the transition and want to make as easy for the previous AA users the transition to CJA in having full access to their workspace as the workload explodes by only having CJA Admins and not CJA User as Owner ins transfer available.KRMarc
I find where I spend most of my time utilizing the log in as feature is on testing new reports - specifically ones where $$USER.ID is involved.I think it would be super helpful if there was a button for admins on the Report Actions to have a “View Report As” feature that allows admin’s to preview a report as a specific user to save all of the clicks between setup and reports.
I get an error in the Journey canvas about missing opt out link in the email body. Se attached image. This is not correct - since there is a opt out link present in a Footer fragment in the same template. The opt out link i coded in the fragment, and are present in the same way with the same ID-s that is needed for the link to work. But for some reason this manually coded link is not recognized as a out out link when AJO checks the code/template. Se picture of the code with the link. It would be nice if manually placed code also could be recognized when it is actually the same code that AJO is creating. This is an unnecessary error message that cases a lot of confusion.
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.
