Task Report: Exclude Self Assigned Tasks (Assigned to ID does not equal Assigned by ID)

[TheresaLa]

I have a request to create a task report that filters out self assigned tasks for a group of individuals. Assignment > Assigned to ID > Equals > [NAMES] Assignment > Assigned by ID > Not Equal > [NAMES] When I enter the above information in standard mode, it deletes one of the two filters which I've found out is the expected outcome. Does anyone know of a Text Mode solution to this equation? Thank you (as always) in advance for any support!! Theresa Larocque Team Lead, Learning Process Governance Suncor Energy

[VickyFi]

Hey @Theresa Larocque I believe Workfront will only let you use the same filter type once unless you are using an OR statement but this wouldn't work in your case. Is there a reason you need both and can't use just one of those options to get the results you want? Hope this helps! Vicky Fitzgerald Telegraph Media Group Limited

[EXP_-_DustinMa]

Hi Theresa, When you're using the same field to filter on multiple times, you need to include an AND:#: before the second time in text mode. It would look like this: assignedToID=USERID1,USERID2,USERID3,etc assignedToID_Mod=in AND:1:assignedToID=USERID4,USERID5,USERID6,etc AND:1:assignedToID_Mod=in I hope this helps! Thanks, Dustin Martin Assigned Support Engineer Workfront

[Doug_Den_Hoed__AtAppStore]

Ahhhh....Very Nice, Dustin! That is a new one for me, AND:1 I am going to save it to the vault! Regards, Doug Doug Den Hoed - AtAppStore Got Skills? Lend a hand! https://community.workfront.com/participate/unanswered-threads

[VickyFi]

This is new for me to too... i just assumed because you can't use the same one in standard mode you couldn't in text mode either. Will be saving it! Thanks Dustin Vicky Fitzgerald Telegraph Media Group Limited

[EXP_-_DustinMa]

Hey Doug, Thanks! I also realized I just told them Theresa to use "equals" twice. The second AND:1: would need to have _Mod=notin to "not equal" the second set of users. (notin= not includes.) There is a help article that goes over the different qualifiers and how to use them: https://support.workfront.com/hc/en-us/articles/217196097-Filter-and-Condition-Modifiers I hope this helps everyone! Thanks, Dustin Martin Assigned Support Engineer Workfront

[SkyeHa]

Wait... there's a vault? -skye

[SkyeHa]

Just wanted to note that the OP was not using the same filter twice (not that this isn't a great solution for that kind of problem). I wasn't able to duplicate the issue at all: in a task report, I don't show "assignment>" categories. In an assignment report, I'm still not able to replicate the problem. In other words, I'm able to create an assignment report leaving myself out. For a generic report actual fields were used, but the text mode behind them boils down to: assignedToID=$$USER.ID assignedToID_Mod=in assignedByID=$$USER.ID assignedByID_Mod=notin (or put actual user names in there if needed) -skye

[EXP_-_DustinMa]

Hey Skye, You know I hadn't even noticed the 'by' instead of 'to' until you mentioned it. It also to me sounds like she is trying to use an Assignment report, not a task report, as a task report has the following 'objects' that can be referenced in the GUI: "task", "Assigned To", "Assignment Roles", and "Assignment Users". I'm curious to see a screenshot of her filters now. Dustin Martin Assigned Support Engineer Workfront

[SkyeHa]

Dustin, while you're here... I am testing and can't get the "AND:1:" to work at all (produces blank report). Is there a support page you can point me to for more help (trying to find the rules for when and how to use)? I'm testing in an hours report and my filter text looks like this: task:name=Build Page task:name_Mod=cicontains AND:1:task:name=Build App placement AND:1:task:name_Mod=cicontains First two lines gives me 185 results, adding the next two lines gives me a blank. -skye

[EXP_-_DustinMa]

Hey Skye, That's odd, I ran it fine (though with different words.) I wonder if it's because of the spaces in the AND filter (Build (space) App (space) placement) Here's what mine looks like: http://drop.workfront.com/09ffb883ea9e And the filters: http://drop.workfront.com/0143837a0885 Let me know if you can't get to the images (some of my customers can't due to firewall rules, so I get it.) Thanks! Dustin Martin Assigned Support Engineer Workfront

[SkyeHa]

Thanks Dustin! I see your images just fine. Bummer. So I guess my understanding was off on how the AND rule operates. SUMMARY: I was really hoping that the "AND" rule would circumvent me having to use "OR" and repeating filters. But it has a really specific use that I'm only just wrapping my brain around now. Leaving spaces on the task name out gives me a result, but not what I was looking for. e.g. I can look for task names containing "Build" and task names containing "GWP," but this results in a list of task names containing both Build and GWP. Which is great but very specific. Similarly on a task report, assignedToID=userA assignedToID_Mod=in AND:1:assignedToID=userB AND:1:assignedToID_Mod=in It gives me "no data to display" probably because user A and user B were never assigned to the same task together. But again, great--just really specific. Thank you for helping me troubleshoot! -skye

[EXP_-_DustinMa]

Absolutely Skye! And yes, it is very specific. You're looking for tasks that contain [statement 1] and [statement 2]. In regards to using assignedToID , I don't like that filter, as it's only looking for the owner of that object. Try assignment users. It's a bit different, so I'd recommend starting in the GUI, add a single user, switch to text mode, and that'll get you moving more in the right direction. Assignment Users looks for any assignment, not just the owner. Very helpful in cases where you have multiple resources assigned. Good luck! Dustin Martin Assigned Support Engineer Workfront

[Doug_Den_Hoed__AtAppStore]

I'm following and concur, Skye. To get Tasks with either userA or userB would be similar, but subtly different: assignedToID=userA assignedToID_Mod=in OR:1:assignedToID=userB OR:1:assignedToID_Mod=in That OR concept can repeat (imagine userA through userZ), but performance tends to degrade (rule of thumb) after 3 or 4 such OR clauses...not to mention that any additional criteria (e.g. Percent Complete < 100) also needs to be repeated for every OR clause. To avoid the OR limitations and simplify the filters, its sometimes preferable to add calculated custom data to the objects being filtered that represents the attribute of interest (e.g. formula behind users that uses multiple IF statements to check other custom data inputs on the users so that the "Users Who Started Within The Past Year With Home Group X And Are Over 5 Foot 2 With Eyes Of Blue" formula resolves to either True or False), then simply filter for that "True". Regards, Doug Doug Den Hoed - AtAppStore Got Skills? Lend a hand! https://community.workfront.com/participate/unanswered-threads

[StevenHi2]

Just taking a stab... Could this possibly work? Assigned To ID=FIELD:Assigned By ID Assigned To ID_Mod=notin Regards, Steve Steven Hirsch The Estee Lauder Companies Inc

[TheresaLa]

Hi everyone, thank you so much for investigating and providing options to make this work. I apologize for not responding earlier as I've been attempting all the options presented in this stream. I'm still not getting the outcome I had been hoping for while the direction you've all provided are so close!! In the end, the report is to provide an output of tasks assigned to USER A, USER B and USER C that were assigned by USER A, USER B, USER C and USER D, USER E or USER F while eliminating tasks self-assigned by USER A, USER B AND USER C. I don't know if this provides any new direction and generates any new thoughts. Happy to hear if it does. Thank you again!! Theresa Larocque Team Lead, Learning Process Governance Suncor Energy

[SkyeHa]

Theresa, maybe it would help if you copy and paste what is in your filters area. In my mind, what would work is two sets of filters. First filter on tasks assigned to user D, E, and F. Then put in an "OR" Then filter on tasks assigned to users A, B and C which are not assigned by A, B and C. -skye

[Doug_Den_Hoed__AtAppStore]

I've been thinking about this one too, Skye; it's a bit tricky! What you've suggested could work, if it's ok to skip (in the second clause of the OR) those Tasks Assigned to A that were assigned by B or C, and Tasks Assigned to B that were assigned by A or C, and Tasks Assigned to C that were assigned by A or C. Theresa, if the edge cases I'm describing do need to be included, let us know, and we can take a stroll down the FIELDS= garden path together. Regards, Doug Doug Den Hoed - AtAppStore Got Skills? Lend a hand! https://community.workfront.com/participate/unanswered-threads

[SkyeHa]

Doug: are you talking about like this? First filter on tasks assigned to user D, E, and F. Then put in an "OR" Then filter on tasks assigned to user A, which are not assigned by A. Then put in an "OR" Then filter on tasks assigned to user B, which are not assigned by B. Then put in an "OR" Then filter on tasks assigned to user C, which are not assigned by C. -skye

[Doug_Den_Hoed__AtAppStore]

Hi Skye, Yes, exactly. If there's a finite set (e.g. A-F) involved, that would do the trick. If it's a more generic "exclude anyone's self assigned tasks", though, the OR's could get pretty unwieldy (as per my first post), so either a FIELDS= exclusion or (recalling my first post) a custom calculated parameter that simply tags tasks as "Self Assigned" Yes or No might be more efficient (e.g. "AND Self Assigned = No"). Regards, Doug Doug Den Hoed - AtAppStore Got Skills? Lend a hand! https://community.workfront.com/participate/unanswered-threads

[TheresaLa]

Thank you Skye and Doug for the continued effort to help me out! Doug, you are correct - the edge cases you've described do need to be included (those Tasks Assigned to A that were assigned by B or C, and Tasks Assigned to B that were assigned by A or C, and Tasks Assigned to C that were assigned by A or B). If the use of FIELDS= will reduce the number of OR statements and will make the report more sustainable that would be a huge benefit. USERS A, B and C are currently a team of 8 people and there are approximately 40 people representing USERS D, E and F. Thank you again!! Theresa Larocque Team Lead, Learning Process Governance Suncor Energy