Expand my Community achievements bar.

Get ready! An upgraded Experience League Community experience is coming in January.

CJA Derived field for Identitymap ID

Avatar

Level 3

Hi all,

I have two datasets in AEP (not enabled for profile). Both datasets have same identity values (CRM ID) but they are being passed in separate schema fields (but both datsets use same identity namespace)

Dataset 1 :- CRM ID is sent in the schema field :- _tenant.crmid

Dataset 2 :- CRM ID is sent in the identityMap :- identityMap.id has the CRM ID value

 

While using both datasets in CJA connection, it looks like the stitching is happening.

But I am unable to create a derived field to combine both identity fields into a single "CRM ID" derived field dimension. When trying to create if else condition, I cannot use identityMap.id 

Is there any solution to get a single dimension instead of using _tenant.crmid and identityMap.id as separate dimensions? 

Topics

Topics help categorize Community content and increase your ability to discover relevant content.

2 Replies

Avatar

Level 3

You can’t do this with a Derived Field and that’s expected behavior.

In CJA, identityMap.* fields are not exposed as normal dimensions, so they cannot be referenced in Derived Fields or CASE/IF logic. They are used only for identity stitching, not for reporting transformations.

That’s why:

  • Stitching works

  • But identityMap.id is unavailable in Derived Fields

Correct ways to solve this

Option 1 (Best / Recommended): Normalize upstream

  • Populate the CRM ID into a regular XDM field (e.g. _tenant.crmid) in both datasets

  • Keep the same value in identityMap for stitching
    → CJA can then use one clean CRM ID dimension everywhere

Option 2 (Acceptable workaround): Use only one reporting field

  • Pick _tenant.crmid as the reporting dimension

  • Let identityMap exist purely for stitching
    → This is how most CJA implementations are designed

Option 3 (Not recommended): Dataset duplication

  • Copy identityMap CRM ID into a custom field via data prep
    → Adds complexity and maintenance overhead

Avatar

Level 3

Hi @SamuelPaulPeter , Thank you so much. This is very helpful!