Product Communities

I am very frustrated by the lack of sharing ability with the Approval Workflows. why is the functionality limited to either a specific person, or the entire company? so either i spend time selecting the exact users for over 400 different workflows. OR i share it with the entire instance and everyone has access to everything in a giant never ending list? We need to be able to share with specific groups and specific teams, Exactly the same way that all the other sharing permissions operate.   

Description - Have the ability to iterate (list method) in calculated fields, the same way it can be done in reports using text mode.Why is this feature important to you - This feature would be valuable as it enables users to reference Workfront objects that are directly related to the one they’re currently working on. It ultimately enhances efficiency and clarity when managing interconnected Workfront objects. How would you like the feature to work - the same it is currently working on reports. Current Behaviour - Is not feasible

Description—It would be ideal if we could Upload and Host an Image to be used in our Custom Forms. Currently, we only have the option to add images by adding the URL of an image hosted somewhere else. The images/documents inside Workfront do not work, as they expire after a few minutes. Why is this feature important to you - This would make the feature easier to use, and located all in one place (Workfront) How would you like the feature to work? If I choose to add an Image in the Custom Form, it would be helpful if I had the option to Upload a File to be used. That file will stay in Workfront and be connected to that Custom Form. Any User with access to the Custom form would also have access to the file. Current Behaviour—Currently, there is no option to upload an Image. We can only enter a URL. Images and documents hosted in Workfront can be added as part of the URL, but because those URLs expire after a few minutes, they generate an Error or broken link and a bad expe

Rename “Last month”  to “1 month ago” in order to enable proper sorting in rows with “2 months ago” & “3 months ago”, Additionally create more “X months ago” to cover at least last 13 months so that trending can be done. Same with week ago would be optimal! Reason? Since person containers are affected by the selected reporting date range, the segment can be evaluated over the panel range rather than independently for every month row.  This is a problem when trending monthly numbers over a longer timespan than 3 months (also the 3 backwards monthly date ranges defy sorting in the right order which messes up bar charts due to “Last month”). Creating custom date ranges allows both proper sorting & meaningful bar charts. However this means each month a new one must be created. Better as suggested to have the X months ago made available in Workspace. 

SUMMARYTwo related asks, the second building on the first:1. An email level or template level switch that disables click tracking for every link in an email at once, equivalent to isOpenTrackingDisabled for the open pixel.2. Allow that decision to reference a person field, so link rewriting is suppressed per recipient at send time rather than fixed per asset.TODAYOpting a link out of click tracking is a per link operation only. It requires either unticking "Track Link" on each individual anchor in the Email Designer, or adding the mktNoTrack class to each anchor in the HTML. Adobe Support has confirmed there is no email level, template level or REST API setting that disables click tracking for all links at once, and that no such capability is on a published roadmap.WHY THIS MATTERSUnder the CNIL recommendation applicable since 14 April 2026, and the Italian Garante deadline of 28 October 2026, click measurement for campaign performance purposes requires consent in the same way open mea

Description - Did you know that Requesters cannot "Add Image" in an Update? I didn't, until a requester asked me why that was missing for them! Why?? Why is this feature important to you - Consistency of user experience, and there is no reason that a Requester should not be able to use this same functionality with UpdatesHow would you like the feature to work - Same as it works for every other access levelCurrent Behaviour - Requesters cannot use the "Add Image" when making an Update

 From Gut Feeling to Grade Point: How AJO Measures Service QualityHow we grade every service behind Adobe Journey Optimizer — and what happens when a grade slips. When you're running customer journeys that depend on Adobe Journey Optimizer, you're trusting that the platform underneath is holding up its end—every trigger fires, every send lands, every integration behaves the way it should. That trust is something we take seriously, and we've built a system to hold ourselves accountable to it in a very concrete way: the Service Scorecard.The Service Scorecard gives every service that powers AJO an automated grade, refreshed twice a day, across four dimensions that together define what “healthy” means: how well we respond when incidents happen, how thoroughly the code is tested before it ships, how much reliability margin we're maintaining against our own commitments, and how quickly we act on reported issues.This is part of a wider effort across Adobe Experience Platform to apply one con

Hi,With alot of users in Analytics, the structure and also findability of existing reports becomes difficult.As an administrator, I would like to be able to create area or topic folders, and default users to save their reports in the their area’s folders.Applicable to AA and CJA

In the past update notifications included the author as the from name in email notifications. Now the sender is simply Workfront. This makes it easy to overlook and difficult to identify/distinguish emails. Please reinstate the prior behavior with the updated format. 

Can we get an API endpoint to update multiple tokens on a program or folder at once?At the moment a single API request needs to be made to update each token 1x1 Looking at the example in the image 20+ individual API requests need to be made to update all the tokens used in the program API call efficiency is important since we have a limited daily API quota  

Description - The limitation of 2,000 returns on the external look up field prevents us from being able to use master data for client names in WorkfrontWhy is this feature important to you - Using an external look up field to allow users to choose from a golden record for our client names would provide more  robust reports in Workfront.How would you like the feature to work - We would like Adobe to increase this threshold as 2,000 returns is very limiting. A query search allowing more options would support our use of golden records for robust filtering.Current Behaviour - the look up field returns the first 2,000 lines only and ignores anything after that. Our master data platform can return up over 16,000 records in 1.8 seconds but they cannot be accessed beyond the first 2,000.

Integration with Microsoft Word and Workfront. We would like to have tracked changes inside of WF or to have the ability to edit documents within the proofing tool.

Currently, the REST API only facilitates running a batch campaign immediately or once at some time in the future: https://developers.marketo.com/rest-api/assets/smart-campaigns/#batch   This idea proposes that the schedule request be modified to allow setting of a recurring schedule for the batch campaign, as can currently be done with the GUI as shown in the attached image.

FEATURE : As a light/contributor/standard user (Reviewer and/or Approver), I want to be able to tag in a comment another user who is not in the workflow. This person should then be able to comment the proof but not make any decision Currently, in Adobe Workfront Proofs, users can only tag (@mention) individuals who are already explicitly added to the workflow (as a Reviewer or Approver).If a project team member needs quick input, clarification, or a second opinion from a colleague who is not part of the pre-defined workflow, they cannot bring them into the proof directly via a comment. Instead, the user has to manually reach out via email/chat, export screenshots, or request an administrator to modify the workflow and assign permissions—all of which creates friction, delays feedback loops, and disrupts collaboration. Business Impact & BenefitsAccelerated Review Cycles: Eliminates bottlenecks caused by rigid workflows, allowing ad-hoc subject matter experts to weigh in quickly witho

Our users have been getting these marketing popups quite regularly in Workfront. A lot of these events are aimed at Admins or users who have very different roles in Workfront.  Is there a way we can disable these messages? If not, can a toggle be added?  

The older version of the API, 1.4, allowed us to download a JSON of the processing rules in a suite.  Since these are instrumental in transforming data into eVars, Props, and Events, they are an essential part of maintaining the data quality of a suite.  The newest version of the API, 2.0, does not currently support accessing the processing rules, and it's been stated on Github that, as of this idea submission, processing rules access is not even on the roadmap.  Unless Adobe is going to eliminate these rules (and the eVars and Props that are driven by them), a mature multi-site installation of Adobe Analytics, esp. across mobile and web, relies on a constant overview of processing rules for maintenance, QA, and to aid site and mobile app developers.Please make sure that processing rules are accessible via the APIs, not just in version 2.0, but in all future versions.  Leaving 1.4 up is not a complete solution, as Adobe may deprecate it at any point.

A way to bulk unpublish or publish Marketo emails to MSI would be very useful. I see similar ideas over 12 years old, so creating a new idea here. I am trying to clean up MSI folders for our SFDC users. I have over 125 emails that I need to unpublish and i need to do the unpublishing manually, one-by-one. Would be great if Marketo would let me bulk check emails to publish or un-publish.

As global platform administrators, we are responsible for creating Developer Console credentials and distributing them to each sandbox administrator. These credentials are intentionally configured with the minimum permissions required to perform the requested action.Today, when a sandbox administrator requests access to a capability such as Data Ingestion, we can find the API documentation that explains the available endpoints and how to use them. However, we cannot find clear information in either the API documentation or Experience League about which specific permissions are required for each operation.For example, the documentation may describe a method such as POST – Create a new batch, including the request format and usage, but it does not indicate which AEP permissions must be assigned to the Developer Console credential in order to execute that operation successfully.Requested improvement:Please add, within each API method or endpoint documentation page, a small highlighted sec

I think the new “Assets” Tab now looks much nicer than the classic view.Having said that, I do miss the old icons that showed whether the trigger campaigns were activated versus not. It was also helpful for the batch ones to see which ones are actively scheduled, previously ran, never ran, etc. Food for thought! 

OverviewData Distiller Accelerators help users move faster from raw data to repeatable analysis by providing Adobe-authored SQL templates for common business, industry, and technical use cases. Accelerators are available in the Queries workspace and can be used to analyze areas such as customer segmentation, campaign performance, commerce behavior, audience overlap, fraud detection, retention, product reviews, attribution, and more. Access and PermissionsAccelerators are available to organizations with Data Distiller entitlements. Users can access them from the Accelerators tab in the Queries workspace. Viewing Available AcceleratorsGo to Queries in the left navigation, then open the Accelerators tab.The accelerator catalog displays available templates with a name and description, making it easy to identify the right starting point for your use case. Using an AcceleratorSelect an accelerator to open it in Query Editor.The SQL is preloaded and read-only by default. Users can provide the

While it is currently possible to select multiple assets within the UI, the available filters do not provide an option to view assets located exclusively in archived folders. At present, users can only choose to include archived folders in their search results, which means archived and active assets are returned together.It would be valuable to have the ability to filter for archived folders only.Use CaseDuring instance clean-up and governance activities, teams often need to review assets that have already been archived. Being able to isolate assets within archived folders would make it easier to distinguish them from live, in-use assets, reducing the risk of accidentally unapproving, modifying, or deleting active assets. This functionality would improve efficiency, support better instance management, and help ensure that clean-up efforts are focused only on retired content.

DescriptionImprove Timesheet Behavior for Manually Pinned TasksWhy is this feature important to youCurrently, manually pinned tasks remain on a user's timesheet even after being marked as Completed or Cancelled. This can lead to confusion, as users may continue logging hours on tasks that are no longer active. It also affects data accuracy and time tracking consistency.How would you like the feature to workWe suggest enhancing the timesheet functionality to better handle manually pinned tasks by:Automatically removing pinned tasks from the timesheet once they are marked as Completed or CancelledPreventing time entry on tasks that are no longer active, regardless of manual pinningIntroducing configuration options to restrict manual pinning based on task statusAllowing system administrators to disable the manual pinning feature (Alt+P) for specific user profiles or globallyCurrent BehaviourUsers can manually pin tasks to their timesheet using Alt+P or the pin iconPinned tasks remain visi

In Assets Essentials view, when I open an asset in a collection, it opens in the file's location, so if I try to page through the assets using the arrows at the bottom, it goes to other assets in the asset's folder instead of the assets in the collection. Ideally, when in a collection, we could page through assets within the collection. Users are confused when viewing assets in collections. This behavior is different in the admin/touch UI.Users should be able to page through assets in a collection. Ideally, this would be the default behavior, but it should at least be an option.

Sometimes we need to create report on something - some area of interest - that is just too ungainly in a single report.The report freezes and crashes. It is hard to read and navigate, and it very slow to load and update.So in general on the platform, I would like a way to do have multiple reports grouped together.I have thought maybe a widget, that acts as a navigation point to link multiple reports grouped together might be something like the TABS you have in an excel spreadsheet. Applicable to Adobe Analytics and Customer Journey Analytcis.

Description - It would be helpful to have an On Hold (ONH) status for Tasks like there are for Projects and Requests. Why is this feature important to you - Sometimes tasks need to be put on hold as priorities change, etc. We'd like to indicate the true status because it's not New, In Progress, or Complete.How would you like the feature to work - Choose On Hold from the Status dropdown menu and remove it from being factored into the Project Condition. Current Behaviour - Tasks have three options New, In Progress, or Complete. We created a custom On Hold status, but it affects the Project Condition, so we adjust the dates repeatedly until the task is re-engaged and changed to In Progress or Cancelled (another custom status created.) For Cancelled Tasks, we can delete the task but it's useful to show the task was considered for the project. We remove dates and planned duration/hours for it so it will not impact the Project Condition. We don't want to remove them from On Ho