- Mark as New
- Follow
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Email to a Friend
- Report
I get it, and trust me, I have a multi-volume manifesto called "Basic Things Workfront Should Do But Doesn't."
That being said, a mindset I would discourage is "we have to spend thousands of dollars just for Workfront to do this one thing that it should already do." That would only be true if you used Fusion to address that singular shortcoming and nothing else.
Instead, I choose to think of it as "we can implement dozens of features and automations in our instance that Workfront could never do for us, because the requirements are so customized to our environment and workflow that they wouldn't be useful to any of their other customers. And it only costs us a little bit more."
In the case of ref num sequencing, Workfront would probably release a feature where each object type has its own running sequence of numbers, and that would be it. It's still going to eventually reach 5 or 6 digits, or flip the odometer and start giving you duplicates. And, that might be okay for a lot of customers, but setting it up in Fusion opens up a ton of possibilities. Your own suggestion for how it should be implemented is a perfect use case for Fusion because you can tailor your serial number in exactly the way that makes sense for your company, but doesn't necessarily work for others.
And Fusion isn't going to do just your project sequencing. It's hypercapable of dozens of similar automations that without it, you wouldn't even consider because they're so labor intensive. (We personally manage tens of thousands of queue topics and routing rules that are generated by custom form values, with hundreds opening and closing each day.) Should Workfront do all of these automations without the extra cost? Sometimes. But a lot of what we throw at it isn't anything that I would ever expect Workfront to develop for us because it's so niche. So if we have it, why not use it to address those things that Workfront should do and just make our teams happy?
For every eyeroll and expression of disbelief I used to get because I had to say "sorry it doesn't do that," I now get a "wow, really?!" (in a good way) when I tell users about a new feature that we've built out to make their time in Workfront more efficient. It makes their life easier, which makes my life easier because I'm no longer the face of something that "can't" but something that "can do that and more."
I don't get anything out of promoting Fusion, I'm just a strong believer that for a little bit extra, it can elevate the performance of any instance. And, when customers use it to solve Workfront's shortcomings in a way that's perfect for them, that feature request becomes one less thing the Workfront development team has to do, so they can prioritize the things that Fusion can't solve - like Chapter 9 of my manifesto, "Custom Field Validation, or the the lack thereof"
Views
Replies
Total Likes