+10
Qualified

Project Requests: Allow Users to Submit New Projects Under Historical Activities w/o Giving Activity/Project Edit Rights

Matt Chabot 1 year ago in Productivity Management updated by Karthik Balakrishnan 2 months ago 3

Goal: Want to give normal users the ability to submit "Project Requests" under historical Activities without jeopardizing compliance safeguards by giving users Activity/Project edit permissions.  

Use Case (Non-Material Updates): 

Our most common use case for a “Project Request” is when a user would like to make an update to a Final File attachment in a historical Activity. Because of compliance restraints, our admin are the only ones who have the right to submit new project templates under an Activity. Once a Requester submits a "Non-Material Update" form, our Admin use the inputted information to locate the historical Activity and initiate a new project template. For audit purposes and overall system searchability, we choose to update the original rather than creating an entirely new Activity so that you can easily locate the most up-to-date version of the document.

Enhancement Request: 

Admin would like the ability to give users the option to submit “Project Requests” under an Activity without needing to give users the rights to edit both Activities and Projects. For compliance purposes, it would be ideal if the list of “Project Request” templates was separate from the regular Project Template list. Admin would have the ability to indicate if a Project Template could be used for “Project Requests” similar to the current subworkflow functionality for “Allow Insert on Task Worksheet”.

With this functionality, Users would be able to independently locate the historical activity and apply a “Project Request” without the need for 3rd party intervention or additional permissions.

Proposed Solution: 

Rather than building out new functionality from scratch, you could modify Change Orders so they do no require Activity/Project edit rights. Additionally, once a user selects a Change Order, rather than sending them to an editable Project Details page to manually initiate the project, have the project initiate automatically. Furthermore, Change Orders are set up as a separate list to the broader Project Template list, so Admin already have full control over what templates can be used.

Open to any other thoughts, but this would be a huge benefit to our users and significantly reduce additional administrative tasks.

Workflow

Hi Eric
Citi already submitted same kind of request.

https://voice.aprimo.com/communities/42/topics/1110-project-work-requestjob-starter

The use case is same, Citi want to contributors to trigger/create projects.

Now contributors are able to create Activities through Work request, and Yes there are able to create projects indirectly. when they submit Work Request Activity and Projects are created through Business rules.

Let say, Contributor want to submit a change order/request in middle of an on-going campaign.

As per requirement, we don't know they want to trigger these change order or some projects. Those project are AdHoc in nature.

In this scenario, If contributor user want to trigger project, then they can't. We need to elevate them Full User.

But other than Triggering this Change order or One workflow Template, that contributor user not going to do anything in the system with Full User access.

Qualified

Matt, what user base is doing this work?  Are these still full users or are they just contributors?  Is the user submitting this additional project the "owner/admin" of the original activity?  Or should any user on the access list be able to add a "project" into an activity this way?

We have also discussed allowing a Work Requestor to submit a project request to an existing activity.  So trying to figure out if this is related or different.

Hi Eric,

We only use full license users, so I'm not fully aware of how everyone is using contributor users.  What I would say, is these are users who are part of our product teams or act as our "Marketers" role, where they own this piece and need to update it for some reason or another.  I.e. There's a typo that needs to be corrected, or data that needs to be updated.

From the Aprimo development side, I would say don't complicate it at the beginning by adding Contributor users into the mix.  Allowing for Project submissions would be such a benefit for so many clients, that making things more complicated and delaying a release is not worth the benefit of potentially including Contributors for the initial release.

Secondly, I would think that as long as the user has "View or Edit" access to the Activity, they should be able to submit a change order request (if they also have the Change Order domain right).  System Admin have multiple levels of "checks and balances" where they can limit the effect of these submissions.  

Some Examples:

    1. Change Order Domain Right

    2. Change Order Selection on Workflow Template

    3. The Change Order workflow design

    4. Reviews built into the workflow design

Requiring a user to be the "Owner/Admin" would require someone with Activity Edit domain rights to input or eventual update those fields before the new user can submit a Change Order.  With highly regulated industries like healthcare, pharma, and financial services, those Edit domain rights are given out on a very limited basis for compliance safeguards.  Additionally, with multiple members being on any one of these marketing/product teams and the amount of ownership transfers that happen with any product, limiting to an "owner/admin" would create an unnecessary 3rd party step in the process.  Again, leave it to the Admin to limit the impact of the Change Orders via the examples above.


In the case of Work Requestors, I would take the same approach.  If the Admin sets up Work Requesters to be on the Activity Access list, then they should have the ability to submit Change Orders if they are also given the Change Order domain right.