Product Communities

Hi all—looking for some ideas/best practices here!I’m exploring how to automate task completions in Workfront based on proof decisions. From what I understand, this requires the document to live at the task level. If that’s the case, I’m curious how others are handling version control across multiple rounds of edits.Do you typically reuse the same task for each round, or create new tasks for each version? Trying to avoid things getting messy while still enabling automation.Example of what I’m trying to achieve:Design R1 – Designer uploads file to the task and marks complete Creative Review R1 – Proof is created and routed for approval Approved → completes Creative Review and moves to execution Changes Required → completes Creative Review and moves to Design R2 → Creative Review R2 This cycle would repeat until final approval.Would love to hear how others are handling this—especially if you’ve found a clean way to manage versions + automation together. Thanks in advance! 

Ready to take the next step in your Workfront journey? On June 18, 1–2 PM EDT, WUG-Philadelphia is hosting a live virtual panel — Building Your Workfront Career: Learn From the Experts — featuring career-savvy Workfront experts and community advocates who are passionate about helping their peers grow and thrive in the field.Open to all Workfront users and members across all Workfront User Group (WUG) chapters — admins, project managers, power users, and all practitioners — expect honest conversations about building long-term expertise, incorporating AI into your professional toolbox, positioning yourself for new opportunities, and the lessons that shaped their careers.This is community-powered learning at its best. Come ready with questions.👉 Save your spot today

Preserve Connected Record Picklist Values in AutomationsIn Workfront Planning, I’d love the ability to create a record and send it to another record type, either within the same workspace or across workspaces, while preserving picklist values from connected records.Right now, when using automations, those picklist values don’t carry over if they come from connected records. For teams using a central taxonomy model, this becomes a real challenge. We end up having to rely on Fusion to handle what feels like a core in-app use case, including working through complex JSON structures and API calls just to pass multi-select values. It works, but it adds a lot of unnecessary complexity for something that should be native. Automatically Associate Projects to Portfolios and ProgramsThere’s also a related gap when creating portfolios and programs through automations. While you can create them, there’s no way to automatically associate the projects generated from those automations back to the port

Ready to take your automation game to the True North of efficiency with ​@RowvillBh1 and I?Join us for an exciting, hands-on exploration of how to bridge the gap between Adobe Workfront and OpenAI using Fusion. Whether you’re based in the GTA, dialing in from across Canada, or joining us from south of the border, this session is designed for anyone ready to work smarter—not harder.In this deep dive, we’ll prove that you don’t need to be a developer to build world-class automations. Our guest speaker, Kaylee Richard, will showcase a live, practical scenario: transforming raw text from a Workfront request into actionable intelligence via OpenAI.What’s in it for you? See it in Action: A front-row seat to a live Fusion + OpenAI integration. Demystify AI: Learn how to make OpenAI accessible and straightforward within your existing Workfront environment. Connect & Grow: Network with a community of fellow enthusiasts and Certified experts who are leading the charge in work management.

Dark mode has become a normal part of the email experience, which means marketers need to think about more than just how an email looks in the default inbox view.The tricky part is that dark mode does not behave the same way across email clients. Some inboxes support custom dark mode styling, some apply their own automatic treatment, and some ignore custom settings altogether. That can make testing feel inconsistent unless you know what to expect.With the new Email Designer in Marketo Engage, you can now do more to prepare for dark mode. Marketo lets you:preview dark mode behavior define custom dark mode styling for supported clients adjust text, background, and button colors swap in alternate assets when needed test rendering across clients with Litmus integrationThat said, it’s important to set expectations correctly: Marketo Engage cannot control how every email client ultimately renders your message.Once the email reaches the inbox, the email client still has the final say. That’s

With network maintenance coming up on one Marketo pod, I was asked whether any features wouldn’t be affected during the maintenance period. First instinct: Nope. Everything uses the network, after all: outbound sends, SFDC sync, inbound LPs and forms, API calls and webhooks, etc. But one feature was unclear: unsubscribes driven by the List-Unsubscribe-Post SMTP header. Don’t think anyone looked into this before (like, anywhere). As you probably know, MAPs like Marketo comply with major email providers’ List-Unsubscribe requirement for optimal inboxing. They include a List-Unsubscribe-Post=One-Click header, plus a List-Unsubscribe header with a unique <https:> URL. Optionally, the old-school <mailto:> URL can also be included. Here’s an example:List-Unsubscribe-Post: List-Unsubscribe=One-ClickList-Unsubscribe: <https://click.example.com/u/NDEwLVhPUi02NzMAAAGhsh1UUD4gY6H_B7Njx0Jc6yQJgFRnh79OM35fojpoyZioqvs37SuRJd8HZ1U99J58MdA5RZg=?emailAddress=NDEwLVhPUi02NzMAAAGhsh1UT80Ef

If your AEM multifield saves correctly in Preview or Publish but loses data in Edit mode, it's almost never a caching issue. Here are the three root causes to check in order.1. Missing composite PropertyThis is the most common cause. Your multifield node needs `composite="{Boolean}true"` otherwise AEM writes flat properties instead of child nodes, which behaves inconsistently between edit and publish rendering.<items    sling:resourceType="granite/ui/components/coral/foundation/form/multifield"    composite="{Boolean}true">2. Sling Model Reading Wrong StructureWith `composite=true`, AEM stores items as child nodes not a String array. Your Sling Model needs `@ChildResource` not `@ValueMapValue`:// Use this for composite multifield@ChildResourceprivate List<Resource> items;3. WCM Mode Hiding Output in Edit ModeCheck your HTL for `wcmmode.disabled` conditions that might be hiding rendered output specifically in edit mode.Fastest Debug StepOpen CRXDE after saving the dialog. If

Adobe has become much more than just a creative software company. Over the past few years, Adobe Advertising and the broader Adobe Experience Cloud ecosystem have played a major role in helping businesses deliver personalized customer experiences across multiple platforms. ()One thing I find particularly interesting is how Adobe combines analytics, audience targeting, AI-driven insights, and cross-channel campaign management into a single ecosystem. This gives marketers the ability to better understand customer behavior and create more relevant advertisements instead of relying on generic campaigns.At the same time, I think there are still challenges for newcomers trying to learn Adobe Advertising products because the ecosystem is very large and enterprise-focused. Many users in online communities mention that there is a steep learning curve, especially for products connected to AEM and Experience Cloud. ()I’d love to hear from others in the community:What has your experience been with

A question that comes up frequently when working with shared Field Groups: does marking a field as Primary Identity in one schema affect other schemas using the same Field Group? And how do you handle required fields that don't apply to your specific dataset?These are two separate concerns that get conflated because they both live in the schema layer.Primary Identity is Schema-LocalMarking a field as Primary Identity is a local decision scoped entirely to that schema. It has zero upstream impact on the Field Group definition or any other schema using it.Identity designation and field group constraints are completely separate layers in AEP's Schema Registry:- Field Group = shared blueprint with structural rules (required, data type)- Schema = local implementation including identity role assignmentsField A stays required everywhere because that constraint is defined at the Field Group level. Field B being Primary Identity in Schema X doesn't change anything for other schemas.Handling Req

If your bounce rate is showing near-zero percentages after migrating to the Web SDK, this post explains why it happens and how to build a reliable alternative metric.Why Native Bounce Rate BreaksAdobe Analytics bounce rate = visits with exactly 1 hit / total visits. When success events fire on page load as separate beacons (component presence tracking, feature flags, etc.), every page visit immediately has 2+ hits so almost nothing qualifies as a bounce, even when users leave immediately.The Solution: Page View-Based Calculated MetricBuild a segment and calculated metric using page views instead of hits:Segment: Include > Visits > Page View (event1) equals 1 Calculated Metric: [Segment] × Visits ÷ Visits = Page View Based Bounce RateThis is immune to your success event inflation because page views don’t increment on non-page-view beacons.Watch Out: Event Multi-FireIf your custom page view event itself fires multiple times per visit (common with SPA frameworks or overlapping Adobe

I’ve been exploring different Adobe advertising and marketing tools lately, and one thing I keep noticing is how much modern campaigns now rely on personalization and user behavior data rather than just traditional ad placement.With platforms like Adobe Experience Cloud focusing heavily on customer journeys, analytics, and audience segmentation, it feels like advertising is becoming much more experience-driven instead of simply pushing ads to large audiences. Adobe communities also emphasize learning, collaboration, and improving customer experiences through smarter workflows and integrations. ()I’m curious how others here approach balancing personalization with simplicity. Do you think highly targeted campaigns genuinely improve engagement, or are users starting to feel overwhelmed by “too personalized” advertising experiences?Would love to hear how different teams are using Adobe tools for campaign optimization and customer engagement.

Hi, Looking for some ideas and support here -  I am the admin for a financial services company, we have lots of regulations. We received a request that we now need to have our approvers “certify” that they checked the asset in the proof for x, y, z. My initial thought is to add a custom form to the document but this would be brand new behavior for our approvers to fill out and don’t love this. We also had someone bring up adding a comment, I also don’t love this because it is manual and think that we will be chasing down approvers to add this (also will mess up my automated workflows). Has anyone ever experienced this or has any idea? TYIA

Buried in the extremely large feature release last month, were a number of layout template enhancements which I wanted to call out for those of you who might have missed it. The LT enhancements are applicable to all contracts as far as I can tell. https://video.tv.adobe.com/v/3483245/Please watch the recording if you’re interested in the new LT functionality below.-- Determine the options that appear in the More menu (proj, task, issue, portfolio, program)-- Determine toolbar options (e.g. you can hide everything except Create Project from Template)-- Customize header fields to include custom fields. (the 5 field limit remains unchanged)-- Customize left nav bars for groups, teams, users, templates Tagging in ​@user01245 for the 4th bullet point -- this might fix your issue more efficiently if you lock your casual requesters out of this section on their details page.

Hello,we are trying to add seo schema to our page, Adobe's documentation suggests to use json-ld to author seo schema, but I am clueless on how to add it as a property to page.json. Whenever I tried to add it as a property to page.json, the content which I author in that page is being rendered as a meta tag with name property which I have defined in page.json. It is not rendering as script tag as it was mentioned in documention. Could anyone help me with this.  Thank You.

Join us for a panel discussion focused on building and advancing your career as a Workfront Admin. Hear from experienced professionals as they share what has fueled their growth, how they have expanded their skills, and the moments that helped shape their career paths.This session will focus on real world insights, from what makes the role fulfilling to how Workfront expertise, Adobe connections, and emerging tools like AI can open new opportunities. Whether you are looking to grow in your current role or take the next step, you will gain practical advice and perspective from those who have been in your shoes.What you will learn: What makes a career as a Workfront Admin rewarding and sustainable How building Workfront expertise can impact your long term career growth Tips for leveling up your skills and positioning yourself for new opportunities How to start incorporating AI into your day to day work Career advice panelists wish they knew earlier This is a session you will not

With Claude or Cursor, is anyone using any MCPs that are helping either with code, workflow or analytics within work being done in Adobe Target?

If you've built a report, view, dashboard, or workflow in Workfront that makes your life as a project manager easier, we want to turn it into a recipe. The PM Cookbook is a community-driven collection of real Workfront setups — by project managers, for project managers. Think of it as your favorite recipe card, but instead of ingredients and steps, it's filters, fields, and the logic behind why it works. What makes a great “recipe”?Share something you actually rely on:A report you run every week A dashboard that stopped the constant “Can you send me a status?” pings A view that finally gave your team one source of truth A workflow that removed manual steps or confusionIf it solved a real problem for you or your team, it belongs in the cookbook. What you’ll submitTo submit your recipe, you’ll need:Recipe name Prep time, yield, and who it serves (e.g., “10 minutes to build, used by PMO leads weekly”) Report / view / dashboard / workflow type Step-by-step instructions with screenshots A s

Hello!  I’m a researcher on Adobe’s Design Research & Strategy team. I am looking for participants who work with digital content and assets directly in AEM or other enterprise-level CMS platforms. Specifically, we want to speak with people who are creating, reviewing, and/or managing digital content themselves. We seek to learn more about how you create, review, or manage content, what friction points, if any, you experience, and how you might be leveraging AI to assist with your work.   Importantly, the design team also wants to get feedback on a new experience they’re considering building. If you think you’d be a good fit, reply here (please @ me so I’m notified) or email me at lauber@adobe.com

Currently, External Lookup fields support JSON-based data sources, but only a single property can effectively be used/returned. This becomes limiting in real-world integrations where systems require a stored value that differs from the user-facing label.Example:[ { "label": "Not Applicable", "value": "not_applicable" }, { "label": "Brand New", "value": "brand_new" }]Today, we can only expose either the label or the value. In practice, this forces us to expose technical/internal values to end users so downstream systems can properly consume the data.A common example is AEM Tags:label → human-readable value shown to users value → internal identifier/path required by AEM for storage and integrationsWith the current limitation, users see implementation-specific values instead of clean UI labels because the native connector must send the correct stored value to AEM.Suggested improvement:Allow External Lookup fields to:display one property in the UI (e.g. label) store/send another property

I was recently configuring maintenance tasks in AEMaaCS and ran into several gaps in the official documentation.Documentation explains the concepts, but some practical aspects are not very clear, especially around:• YAML-based configuration of maintenance jobs• How these jobs relate to the maintenance window• How to test them locally, since YAML configs are not supported in the SDK• How (or if) it’s possible to verify execution by yourself via logs in AEMaaCSI had to raise an Adobe support ticket to fully understand the behavior.After going through the full setup, I documented everything end-to-end - including configuration and testing approach.Sharing it here in case it helps someone else working with AEMaaCS maintenance: https://medium.com/@nikitamitroshin/maintenance-in-aemaacs-a-complete-setup-guide-7580dd67b770Comments and feedback are welcome!

 Ever see this in a Smart List filter?The 2 options look the same to the naked eye. And whichever one you choose, you get the same results on the People tab. Yet records with the first value will prevent the person from syncing to SFDC because it’s not in the corresponding picklist! See, due to a malformed CSV import, there’s an extra U+2060 WORD JOINER before the G in the first option. That character is by definition invisible, so it makes sense that they look the same in the UI. (Though note several visible whitespace characters have the same behavior.) They also look the same in the person detail:I call this Schrödinger’s whitespace (or whitespäce to be more metal): it’s either absent or present depending on how you look for it.in Smart Lists, Marketo trims whitespace when creating the underlying database query, which is why the People results are the same but the character is still there in the database, so when you sync to SFDC — and this is absolutely, 100% appropriate! — the att

Are you passionate about AEM and eager to share your expertise with the community? The Adobe Champion Program recognizes our most knowledgeable and passionate practitioners—those who help drive product adoption by:   Sharing technical expertise, best practices, and strategies with the broader customer community.  Collaborating with Adobe teams through product feedback, beta testing, and roadmap discussions  Each year, 40 AEM Champions are selected through a rigorous application and review process. Will you be amongst the 2026-2027 class? Join our live webinar to learn more about the program, benefits, selection process, and how to make our application stand out. Whether you're a seasoned expert practitioner or an aspiring leader in the AEM space, this is your opportunity to unlock the Adobe Champion advantage.   Date: Thursday, May 14, 2026    Time:  9am PT | 12pm ET | 6pm CET  Register here:  https://engage.adobe.com/adobe-dx-unlock-champion-advantage.html?trackingid=4SC98SFY&m

  In my recent project I extensively worked with Permission Sensitive Caching and Closed User Groups, aka. CUGs. It turned out to be a little more complex than I anticipated. So I started a 6-part article series to document and share my learnings: Part 1 — Using Closed User Groups to Control Access Part 2 — Setting up the Dispatcher and CDN for Permission Sensitive Caching  Stay tuned for more to come. 

Summary:The native `workfront-maestro:createRecord` Fusion module does not fully abstract field IDs for linked/connection fields (many-to-many relationships), despite Workspace and Record Type being correctly selected by label from the UI. Expected behavior:The native module should handle the internal field key mapping automatically — developers should never need to know or use raw field IDs like `F69d64ac7f0097169d4b252c8` or construct objects with `_id` suffixed keys like `{"F69d64ac7f0097169d4b252c8_id": "Rc69..."}` manually. Actual behavior:For linked/connection fields, the module exposes `fieldID_id` suffixed keys in the nested object spec. Developers must manually construct payloads like:`[{"F69d64ac7f0097169d4b252c8_id": "Rc69..."}]`This defeats the primary value proposition of the native module over a Custom API Call, which is to abstract away raw field and record IDs. Impact:Teams building automations with linked fields are forced to hardcode field IDs into their Fusion scenar

Adobe Experience Manager (AEM) and Adobe Journey Optimizer (AJO) together provide a powerful ecosystem for delivering personalized customer experiences at scale. While AEM manages content and digital assets, AJO orchestrates customer journeys using real-time data from Adobe Experience Platform (AEP)..