+48
In Progress

Ability to Edit Activity/Project/Task title through workflow template

Karthik Balakrishnan 2 years ago in Productivity Management updated by Amelia Ross 3 months ago 46 1 duplicate

when multiple project triggered automatically from a mail workflow (using same workflow template), all the projects triggered have same name.

So should have an ability to change the Activity/Project/Task title using EA value from workflow template.


Duplicates 1

The ability to change activity to change project is an one step beyond to others to make a valuable work template.This one is the one that ive'd been talking and just like this rate your professor i'd relly impress of your activity here just keep it what you have started.

I'd be glad to update you on our work in this area.  We are creating a new System Parameter titled "Title for System Generated Projects" that provides there options for Projects started as a result of a business rule or status action. The default is "Template Title" which is the way it works now.  Two other options are "Activity Title" and "Empty".  We expect this to be part of Release 123. 

Hi Eric

Citi voted for Option 2: 

2. The ability to set the project title value by concatenating multiple other fields together in Status Actions.

Question on what are the fields we can concatenate with Activity or Project title.

We have different data types in EAs. Text, Picklist-Encoded, Numeric. We are looking for concatenate Title with Picklist-Encoded. Say we need to trigger 5 of same template automatically. one for each product (say we have 5 products). In this scenario, we want to concatenate product EA (Picklist-Encoded) value with Project title.

(Multi-select and Long text will not make sense to concatenate with Title)

Option 2 is our preference, but Option 1 will work for us.  

Hello Everyone,

So the team was working on the Option 1 approach on this and brought up some questions/challenged the approach which made us step back and rethink the solution to solve this and we have discussed an alternative that might be a better overall solution.


The key problem for most customers is that when you apply templates automatically to activities when the Project gets created we automatically set the Project Title to be the same as the Template Title used to create it.


And because the Project Title field has a value there is no way to "force" a user to change the title and enter a better "real" title. So the real issue here is the fact that we set that default Title value on creation.

What if we create a new system parameter that controls the default value of projects created via automation (business rules or workflow actions) and give it 3 options:

  • Template Title
  • Activity Title
  • Empty

The initial value for this parameter would be "Template Title" so everything would continue work as it does today.  However, each customer could chose their preference going forward.


If you want to "force" users to enter a proper title, set the default to be "Empty" and then the project would be created without a title, the first task in the workflow could display the Project Title field and make it required.  Since it is empty the user would have to complete the Title to close the Task.


I know that some customers that have a 1 Activity to 1 Project model will just set the Project Title to be the same as the Activity Title.  Those customers could then set the default to "Activity Title" to simplify that step.


Everyone else who likes how it works today can leave it "as is" with the default set to "Template Title".


We think this is a cleaner and easier approach then making special configuration options on the DCT for just the Project Title field.

The team is going to pause on the work for right now as wait for feedback form this group.  Please let us know your thoughts on this new approach asap.

Thanks,
Eric

This works for us as well...........we are one that has a 1:1 relationship (one Activity to one Project)

This approach would work well with our process

This would work for our processes today

Teradata, like many others have noted below, could greatly benefit from Option 2 - has this option been put on the roadmap yet?

Yes it is in on the roadmap.  We are investigating the options and I will have more information soon.

I will have more information on how the solution might affect existing DCTs and the timing of the solution soon.

Hey there - wanted to ask about the retro impact of this change. Will this affect DCTs that we already have configured with the project title on the DCT as required? In other words, for existing DCTs, will the project title be blanked out if it is already marked as required? If so, we would want to make the update prior to this change for any instances where we do not want the title blanked out. And if not, what will be the process of updating existing DCTs to take on this new feature?

Unfortunately work on this was interrupted but Option 1 will be delivered in May. I will update this thread with more definitive information on the Release/dates when I can confidently do so.  Thanks for your patience.

Hi Eric, is this feature still targeted for April? (Option 1 as described below)

In Progress

We are going to start with offering a solution for Option 1.  We will be adding two new field options into DCT configuration.

Activity Title (empty)

Project Title (empty)

If you pick these new fields and put them in the DCT then when the field is displayed it will be blank regardless of what is actually stored in the field.  This way you can show it on a DCT and make it required and when it is displayed to the user it will be empty and they will be forced to fill in a value before closing their task.

The standard Activity and Project Title fields will also still be available so they would work like normal so if you want to show the actual title to allow them to edit that will also still be an option.

This work is assigned to a team and should release likely sometime in April.

At this time we are not planning to do Option 2 but will continue to evaluate it.  Once this work completes I will close this Idea down and create a new one specifically just for Option 2 so we can continue to track that. 

Do we have any tentative timeline on this request?

CVS Retail would be interested in Option 2. 

Option one would be really helpful for Barclays, our submitters have not be modifying the project title  field when it pulls in so when it is received to be reviewed in our other areas, it doesn't provide the detail needed in the reviewers view of the project.    Required field would be optimal.

I see value in both options depending on the scenario.  Projects we use standard naming conventions while activity/tasks do not in our organization.  But, any time we can prefill fields based on other known information, we would take advantage of this option.

We would want to do option #2 for the Activity Title

Genworth would vote for Option 2.

When Citi raise this request, we are looking for Option 2.

Comcast's preference is option 2. 


Option 1 (setting the title to blank) works in some workflows but there are others where the first task is not assigned to a role that should be entering the Project Title 

Circling back on this topic.  There are two ask here.

1.  Option to set the Project Title to a blank value so that a user is required to entered a real title instead of leaving the default value.

2.  The ability to set the project title value by concatenating multiple other fields together in Status Actions.

I know this Idea has a lot of votes but how many customers would see value if we just did option 1 to start or is most of the interest here with option 2.

If there is a split in interest I might break this apart so we can track the two options separately.

At Franklin, we have a 1:1 relationships, where under the Activity we only have one Project, we never have multiple Projects under an Activity.  From our perspective, the Project title will always be the same as the Project Template title.  We are okay with the above changes proposed as long as they are optional and by default it won't affect our Projects.

1)  We are okay with this as long as it is optional.  We don't have Project title fields on our DCTs.  It is always the Activity title.

2)  We are okay with this only if it is optional on Status Actions.  We wouldn't be implementing this in our Projects.

Monash would like Option 2 as a priority.  However; Option 1 is an improvement.  Thanks.

Wells Fargo's preference is to prioritize #1 ahead of #2.  Both add value, but the ability to blank out the field adds more for us. 

Hello Aprimo, I was just checking if this feature was on the upcoming roadmap yet? :)  Thanks very much for any update.

We would like the ability to concatenate 2 fields for the Project Title would be a good start for us.

Other than the possibility of having the project name blank and required when manually applying a workflow template we would not need this type of functionality.


We already have the project title in our DCT's so it can easily be edited if desired.



So there are two threads going in this idea that are related.

1) Provide the option to "blank" the value of the Project Title field when shown in a DCT on a task.  This would force the user to complete field with a title and not just skip over it since a value already exists.  Would their be value in allowing this on any field in a DCT rather than just the Project Title field?  Maybe we add a new choice in the "Required" field on the configuration page so there would be "No" "Yes" and "Yes - Default Empty" or something like that.  Then for any field we would blank the value on the screen so the user is required to complete it even if the field on the Activity or Project already has a value? 

2) Provide the option in status actions to set the Project Title field value using values from other fields.  For this idea, how complicated would this be?  Can it be as simple and FieldA + FieldB which the "Fx" function supports today?  This is limited to concatenating two fields only together or one field and a constant I believe.  Would this be a good start or not enough?

1.   The problem with this idea is the problems this would cause with iterating tasks or DCT seen multiple times throughout a workflow.  It would require a user to input the field multiple times or required admin to expand there DCT count x10.  I think it would be best to set it up the same way all of the non-base fields are setup in that you can use an action on the workflow step to clear the field.  That way the admin has complete control over when the user needs to fill out the field.  

2. Two would be a great start, but 3 or 4 would be even better.  With 2 we would be able to combine our unique identifier field with the project title.  (i.e. XX0000.000.000_Infographic for Conference X).  With 3 or 4 we would just add to that, probably adding field like the audience or product name. This would also help an issue on the Reassign Tasks page, where it is very difficult to select a task/review and the associated project team as the Project Title is the only string column available for reference. It is not as bad for Activity title because we have users fill that out on their Work Request Forms. 

I would prefer option 1. Allowing Project Titles to be blank and having the ability to require a user to provide appropriate information.  They also need to be able to modify their titles within a DCT on a task prior to the review.  Right now, Super Users and System Admins have to do this for them due to domain rights and it incurs an additional Expense with 3rd party support. 

For Option #2 - I NEED this to be added when uploading Attachments.  That's where combining fields and forcing naming conventions would add more value for Novartis.


In the above screen shot it looks like SAAS is missing features that we have today in P10.  We need to have the flexibility to define our own columns in the Project Teams






My current customers would greatly benefit on having a status action concatenate selected fields such as 'Current Project Title - Activity Title" to be the new Project Title.   We are starting to explore the new Resource Capacity, which only shows Project ID and Project Title, which is not enough info.   So, having an updated Project Title would help with resource capacity planning.

We have a business case where the Activity Owner needs to be editable on a task as well through a data collection template. 

This would be another added benefit for Novartis.  However, it would need to be dynamic so that if there was a task currently assigned to the Activity Owner that also was updated.

We have the same issue.    The only way we could replicate our name convention (and others I have seen at other Aprimo customers) would be the ability to create a field by concatenating multiple fields together.    Example would be Activity ID - Type of Piece (EA) - Suggested Project Title (EA) .   If we could set title with a new concatenating ea though a port status action, we could update to Project Title before the first task is seen.

New

There is the option to make the Project Title field an editable field inside a Data Collection Template today in the application.  Are you asking to do this more automatically instead of having a user update the Title through a task?


Also, what is the use case for making Activity or Task title also editable?  I would think the Activity Title should be correct when created and task seems too low a level for this.  Are you thinking the Task Owner would want to rename their own tasks?

We tried making the base project title field editable in DCTs specific for activities with multiple projects.  Unfortunately, users would more often than not skip over the field because it was already filled in with the workflow title and it did not require them to perform an action before closing the task/review.  We ended up just creating a EA called Project Title that we use in our DCTs now.  

I agree that being able to update the Project Title through WF Templates is preferable to the current ability to have the Title updated through a DCT in a Task.


Because the Project Title will always already have a value, there is no way to guarantee an assignee will update the defaulted title.

Also, our specific parent Workflow can kick off 20+ children WFs and the first Task in the child WFs is assigned to an external creative agency. We would not want them to be responsible for differentiating between child projects & manually updating the Project Title and would prefer the Title is accurate/meaningful when this first Task is assigned.


We have users that utilize the Project List to track jobs and until the default title is updated it is difficult for them to differentiate between the child Projects currently.

A common use case for making Activity Title editable, is that the job starter form was submitted with the wrong title (i.e. "Please update title") because it is required on the configuration side and requesters are not REQUIRED to change it...this is part of another request....and therefore, the PM or someone needs to modify it within a task. Same goes for Activity  Owner/Administrator  https://voice.aprimo.com/communities/42/topics/1081-activity-request-title-field-should-not-be-required-on-the-configuration-side

Yes, we want way to update the project and activity title using EA Value's provided in the Job starter or activity/project page when user creating those.
Example: Let say requirement is to trigger same workflow based on multiselect EA value ( Channels).

So we should trigger one project/workflow template for each channel in same activtiy.

when we do this, all project name will be in workflow template name. and when go to project list page you can't differentiate project according the channels.

For Activity name change, one my teammate working in India have valid scenario. I will get you by tomorrow.

 

Sorry I entered Task by mistake. But having ability to edit task title with EA values will be helpful.

Agreed, we have had to get creative to work around this, but it would be very helpful.  However, I'm unable to provide a simple suggestion for how I would see you best implementing this for all use cases.


Please do keep this same issue in mind when you do the new feature to kick off JSFs from an asset or group of assets in the Aprimo DAM.  thank you!




Wells Fargo would also like the ability to clear the Project title so users will have to enter a title when they open their next task as it will be required.  We added this to voice yesterday however these could be combined:

https://voice.aprimo.com/communities/42/topics/1363-enable-the-project-title-for-workflow-edit-attribution-action

I agree that the ability to set the Project Title to empty would be a beneficial feature.