Forwarding Proofs - should the recipient have to sign in?

[BrandonNW]

Hello -

We have our proofing process set as follows:

Project Owner shares proof with Client. The Client then uses the "share this proof link with others" link from the received email notification to share with SMEs.. The third party recipient is then forced to log in and create a password for PHQ. The Client who is first shared the proof merely has to put in an email address and then they have the access needed to review. Is there a way for the third party recipient to gain access w/o maintaining a password for PHQ?

[JillAc]

Following

[Heather_Kulbacki]

The "share this proof link with others" link has been a huge pain point for us. We haven't had anyone say they need to create a password when that link has been used. So I suspect we have something different in the Proof Settings than you have.

We have "Allow downloading the original file" and "Allow sharing proof via public URL or embed code"

But "Require Login," "Require decisions to be electronically signed," and "Allow subscribing to proof via public URL or embed code" are all unchecked for us.

The issues we run into is when that third party receives the proof, when they try to open it an email is sent to the proof owner -- which is typically a designer or web content author for us, unless the project manager has set themselves as the owner when they sent out the proof, some remember to do this, some don't.

The proof owner then has to approve that third party's access before they are able to open the proof. And the designers and authors typically ignore that email if they receive it, so the third party never gets approved.

Also whoever approves that third party's access really should move that person to the correct proof stage, they are defaulted to whatever the first stage is.

This delay has caused a lot of confusion, so generally the person who originally received the proof notification email just forwards that email to the third party. Which has it's own set of issues since whoever opens the proof from that email basically logs into the proof as the original email notification recipient and has whatever approval access that person had.

If you come up with something that works seamlessly for those third party reviewers, I'd love to hear about it.

[BrandonNW]

Hey Heather...

It is interesting that your third party recipients do not have to use a password. I have attached out settings, but I believe they are the same. Do you leverage SSO for your proof users and do they all have licenses?

As for the authentication email sent to the proof owner, I think that may be in the subscription settings. I am not 100% sure on that one though.

[CalvinFold]

For us, the reviewer who shared it out would need to make the comments and take ownership for the responses from the "team" they used, or it would be required each responsible reviewer have an account and be directly added to the routing (i.e., instead of the routing forwarded to them by some other reviewer).

We deal with a fair bit of artwork with regulatory and legal consequences so this kind of direct accountability and sign-off is absolutely necessary.

So basically, sharing links is not allowed by way of process.

The other aspect different about our setup is Workers (designers) do not start routings; Planners (project managers) own the routings and are gatekeepers/filters of comments received.

[BrandonNW]

Thanks Kevin.

We too, have the PMs set as the owners. In our case the PM would never know who that third party recipient would be so that is why we allow the sharing. I guess they will just have to log in each time. boooo 😉

[TracyPa2]

I was working on putting together an instruction sheet for our reviewers to step by step them through the approval process and I came in to this problem on step 1.

We were always assuming the reviewer could share the proof with whomever they needed since we all could but I tested it today as the reviewer and that is not the case. First I did not have the subscribe option checked so every time a proof was shared it asked for the new person to sign in and then would give them the error that the proof is unable to be subscribed to. I found where to check off the allow subscribe option but like you mentioned above now it sends a request for access to the proof owner before they can get in there to comment. This really isn't a very good option.

We have many requests entered by a department administrative assistant. We send the proofs to them for approval and they are the ones that let us know if its approved or not. BUT in almost all occasions they need to share the proof with their boss to get their feedback and approval. Am I right to assume the only options are.

1. admin asst shares the proof and the boss has to request access from the proof owner in order to comment
2. admin asst downloads the proof and emails to boss causing all comments to be outside of the proof program
3. admin asst shares the proof but the boss just looks at the pages and send their comments separately in an email

We are tying to roll this out to our entire property but none of these options seem like a great method for sharing these.

It would be nice if we could give the Admin Asst (Reviewer license) the ability to add someone to their stage and give them the proof level they would like OR even if the request for access went to the person that added them instead of back to the proof owner.

Has anyone found a better way?

[Heather_Kulbacki]

Hi Tracy,

Not a "better" way, but what we do is the person looking to share the proof with someone else just forwards the proof notification email that they received.

The downside here is that any comments made by the person that email gets forwarded to, appear to be made by that original receiver of the email. And if that original person has decision access, the second reviewer is able to make a decision for them.

[JillAc]

How about the person who shares with the Admin also shares it with the boss at the same time? You could make a field in the form upon submission of the request “who should the proof be shared with” and train the person distributing the proof to look there to find out who they need to distribute to?

[TracyPa2]

I tried to get that "who needs to approve the proof" field added last month and got vetoed in my leadership meeting but I have a stronger argument for it now and another leadership meeting tomorrow. Hoping to get that added. That will resolve a good portion of the issues.

The only ones left would be when we send proofs to out VP of marketing and she likes to directly share with the VP of accommodations or the CEO. She will have to use one of the other less preferred options.

It's a shame because we really try to preach to keep everything in WorkFront but sometimes we just can't.

[BrandonNW]

I checked with one of project owners (one who would set the proof routing) and she does not have to approve access for a SME. I'm not sure what would be different in the settings. Subscription must be checked and the original recipient must share the proof with the email link, "share this proof with someone else".

[TracyPa2]

that's exactly how I did it but it sent an email to the proof creator to allow access.

The photos attached in backwards order but the bottom one shows our proof settings, middle shows the share this proof with someone link and top shows the email it sends the proof owner

[BrandonNW]

Also might want to check the Subscription settings. "Subscriber must click a link in an email to access a proof" - we have this set to 'no emails'. Im not sure if that may be the culprit here.

[TracyPa2]

changed my setting to "no emails" but the same thing happens. The person who it is shared with gets the Sign In button at the top, when they click that they have to type in their email address. Then the window expands asking for a full name. once they click sign in they get the window saying we received your subscription request and it sends the request to the proof owner