Financial Data Access/View (Expenses) - Reviewer/Work License

[#1]

This idea is for Reviewer/Work license users to have the ability to view financial data/expenses within a project they are on. Right now they cannot see any financial data on the project because their plan license does not allow for "manage" rights even though the access level for the Reviewer licenses is set up with "View" under the "Financial Data" category - which does not work because of my previously stated comment about "manage rights". (sigh)

I previously submitted this bug (err, feature) as a support ticket which was later closed because of the whole manage rights thing. But it is still an issue for us as we would like certain users to see this information... specifically for the project they are on. The option to give Financial Data (view) access can still be given/selected but does not work (again, because of the "manage rights" problem). Today I submitted a follow-up ticket which will probably get the same response originally given (you guessed it, because of the "manage rights" roadblock)... but I digress. :)

So if this is a pain point for you too, please consider upvoting this idea to actually give the view rights to any license user we desire.

Thanks in advance!

[#2]

Another thing to mention is a "reviewer" is often the project sponsor for us.... maybe that's wrong, but that is how we are set up. Thanks for your consideration.

[#3]

We have this same challenge. We'd love our workers to be able to add and contribute to financial objects in the same way they can add and contribute to issues or tasks.

[#4]

I agree. Our clients are the sponsors of the requested work and it's a pain point not to be able to share the detailed billing information for their projects with them.

[#5]

Absolutely agree! It is essential for project collaboration for project team members to input their own planned expenses and see those entered by their functional team members.

[#6]

This is a must have; it's silly that someone with full access to a project can't see the expenses that someone else added in.

[#7]

Absolutely agree!

We have an active case open with WF and are thoroughly disappointed to learn - When it comes to the Expenses in a project, a user must have Manage sharing permission (available only to Plan licenses) in order to view expenses that have been added by other individuals in both the Business Case and the Expenses tab.

Contribute sharing access that Workers often have allows for adding new expenses, but they still cannot see other expenses that have been added to the project.

When it comes to the Review license types, when it shows that they have access to view Fiances, this only allows them to view the Finance subtab under Project Details.

In our opinion It does not logically make sense that If someone can see the business case tab and its summary (net value, budgeted cost, potential risk, planned benefit, % aligned), then they should be able to see all details relevant to those numbers. Expenses are not specific to the user who entered them, they are project level expenses. We would not purchase Plan licenses just for individuals to hit approve as reviewers are for reviewing, how can they review if they can't see everything? It doesn't make sense that a reviewer could see (and approve) a business case without being capable of seeing everything which is in the business case they are approving.

WF noted the best option for the Reviewers to see those expenses without changing their Access Level would be to create a report that will pull expenses from the Projects and to give the reviewers access to that report.

This certainly doesn’t live up to ‚Äòoptimizing modern work’ in our opinion.

We clearly have internal process issues for reviewers approving business cases as this is the first time since our launch 3.5 years ago that someone has questioned the variance between the total costs of a business case (NET VALUE. BUDGETED COST, PLANNED BENEFIT) and the viewable details of a business case.

[#8]

Hi Everyone,

Here is a workaround we put in place...

We created an expense report (with Run report rights of Admin name), put it in a dashboard, and put the dashboard in our Task Assignee layout templates (1 for Worker, 1 for Planner who are not our core PMs) on Layout> Customize Tab > "A Project". These task assignees can see all expenses entered on the project when they click on that tab.

This is in Classic, we are not using New Experience yet.

Tracy - We don't have Reviewers as part of our process so I haven't tried Reviewer access.

[#9]

@Tina Huang

I'm not able to find where you did these steps: put the dashboard in our Task Assignee layout templates (1 for Worker, 1 for Planner who are not our core PMs) on Layout> Customize Tab > "A Project".

Can you clarify?

thanks!

[#10]

Yes please - this creates a ton of work for us as the workaround for us to build custom dashboards for each client where the filter is projects only for their company and then run it as a power user. They can see it this way without duplicating when you are in a single project but when you want to combine projects into a summary view and show it outside of a signle project it is a pain in the tuckus. so we basically now have tons of clone dashboards and cloned layout templates for each client that needs to see combined financial data across projects.

If this was not the case, we could have a report that just used a dynamic filter where Project.Company ID = User..CompanyID, but as the report needs to run as me than that does not work.

PLEASE Workfront friends PLEASE. This restriction seems completely arbitrary unless the only reason for it is to get us to by my expensive licenses but we have 100s of customers and that is not feasible.

[#11]

Thank you for the submission! We think this is a good enhancement to the Workfront platform overall and this product area in particular!

Workfront currently prioritizes large-scale, foundational enhancements such as the new Reporting experience and changes to the core data model, so this item does not fit in our near-term roadmap. As such, I am marking this as Declined now, but we'll keep this in our backlog for the improvements for this area so that we can revisit the decision in the future.