Increase number of resource managers

[#1]

At the moment, you can only have 30 resource managers.

We need more as we have a large studio and many users need oversight of all projects - but have been advised that the limit is at 30 for speed/efficiency reasons.

It would be great if we could have an increase in the number of resource managers we can have, without sacrificing the speed of the system.

[#2]

We have a similar need. I've heard in the Power Team meetings and in the community that they are planning to move the resource management access away from the Resource Manager field on projects and instead have it be part of the access level. I'm not sure where it lies on their roadmap in terms of time. Maybe someone from the workfront side could weigh...

[#3]

Hi James, I'm going to send this idea to my CSM as she will share with her other customers if they have a similar need to try and get it up voted - perhaps you could do the same so hopefully we can get this implemented sooner rather than later? We're really struggling with having 30 max.

[#4]

Upvoted. Rather than increase the number of resource managers, I would also have a different way to configure this. Managing this at the user level by project is a bit of a nightmare for us - it leads to a lot of overhead when staff transition, as Resource Managers are often Team managers and resource management is handled at lots of different levels of our org. One potential option would be an access level that could be global or associated with your own configured groups or teams, so you can open up resource management access more easily. Thanks!

[#5]

I'm in agreement with what is being proposed here, in particular the proposal from Courtney. I would also challenge Workfront to make resource management less costly and more flexible for organizations that perform resource planning independently of project management. Perhaps a middle tier license or a 'Worker +' level to allow management to engage in resource planning and scheduling. This is critical for larger organizations requiring centralized planning methodologies. Thank you!

[#6]

In case this is helpful for other folks: I originally thought that visibility into the Resource Planner was limited only if you had a Plan license and you were listed as a Resource Manager at the project level (aka, you can only see the projects that specifically had you listed as a Resource Manager).

This is true for the role view, but for the user view you can enable visibility by sharing projects with a team (as opposed to indicating the explicit user as a Resource Manager). We've created a Resource Management team and shared all projects/templates with this team to open up global visibility at the user level. This way we can manage that with membership to the team rather than project by project user identification.

[#7]

Up voted. very much in need to complex projects and organisations, Functionality at Role or user level to allow for assignments and resource planning and scheduling

[#8]

Strongly upvoted. This is a constant issue for our group who very robustly uses the resourcing tool.

[#9]

need it so much, we have teams of >50 people and they need this access

[#10]

Up voted! We have well over 30 people that will have to have the resource manager access

[#11]

Wish that I knew that this 'idea' was here earlier.

WorkFront, why the artificial limit?