Community Advisor

Processes around Group vs. System Admins?

Forum|Forum|9 months ago
April 1, 2025
1 reply
338 views

Hello, WF community! Looking for some input, would like to understand what different customers are doing that have group admins.

How do you handle governance/change management/updates in production? Not governance in terms of access levels and such, more like processes among group & sys admins when it comes to making changes in production for their groups. Are you doing a free for all approach where the group admins can do whatever they want directly in prod? Or do you have an approval process of sorts like group admins make updates in sandbox and only sys admins can review and push to prod? If you have guardrails or an approval process, what is it?

I'm sure there's a mix, so looking for examples on your approach to group vs. sys admin change management/controls around what goes live in production. Thank you in advance!

Workfront

Lyndsy-Denk

Community Advisor

For our instance, system administration takes the lead on most everything because we don't have a strong culture of group administration. In that case, I use group admins as more of an advisory council. For our instance, a group admin earns more freedom when they've:

Completed training
Consistently complied with governance
Regularly participated in admin activities

That said, I use Workfront itself to keep me informed of what group admins are doing and what they want to do. To do that, I use a request queue for users (including group admins) to ask for things, assign tickets to my group admins, run reports on housekeeping activities, and keep a backlog of maintenance and optimization needs (including those that group admins are leading). It's less about micromanaging and more about ensuring that group admin work aligns within our system's overall strategy.

Sign up

Login with SSO

Login to the community

Login with SSO

Scanning file for viruses.

This file cannot be downloaded