+12
Done

Feedback: New Field Restyling - Optional Fields

Alex Gregorio 1 year ago in Productivity Management updated by Rachel Phillips 5 months ago 12

With the switch to no longer labeling required fields with an asterisk and instead labeling non-required fields with "...-optional" is creating some confusion for users. Some of these fields are read-only fields -- this is a change that we are not looking to reconfigure and would prefer some flexibility around the labeling or required vs. non required rather than simply switching the configuration. 


This will be released in version 118. Here is a final screenshot grabbed from the activity screen of what the page looks like in Edit Mode.

Hello,

We did go with the Required (word) label approach in Edit mode with the color around it.

I'm hoping that once you see it in action, it won't take a lot of getting used to. Those fields really pop on the screen now.

We are hoping to get this out in release 118, so you should be able to see it for yourself very soon!

Rachel

Hello!  I just recently had the Field Control Restyling feature flag re-enabled in my Sandbox environment to get a feel for it before introducing it to my end users.  I really do like how the form has been reorganized and flows much easier.  Since the new Required Label has not yet been implemented, I did a super quick mock up, because I was curious how it would look. 


I did one with the label and one with the asterisk. Both present two very different look/feel.  How did the team land on using a label vs. an asterisk? Is there any insight that can be shared?  Was there user feedback given that spelling out the word "Required" is a better for the overall user experience? 

Because the restyling is so very different from the old form layout, I wonder if some familiarity should remain by using an asterisk instead of a label?  Just a thought.  Again, I really like what the team has done with the new layout, and I think my user will really like it...once they get used to it! ;)


Side Note, in our environment we use a slightly different naming convention...Campaign is the same as Activity and Parent Campaign is the same as Campaign.

Form with Label
Form with Asterisk
In Progress

The development has started this sprint.  Hope is to release this in either r118 or r119 depending on how quickly the development work can wrap up.

However, I want clarify how this will behave.  After further discussion internally we have determined that we will simply show the "Required" label all the time for the required fields rather than hiding it once the field has a value.  After considering, while the visual look of removing the label seemed nice, it could also be confusing to users that the field shows a "required" indicator sometimes and not other times and they may not make the connection that the field having a value is what is driving the label to show.  For example, you have a field with Channels, you do not see a required label above it so you think you can remove it, but once you do then a "required" label appears and it will not let you save.  It is probably cleaner to just some the label all the time to the user.

Also, this is only on the edit page so if you want a less cluttered view of the information you can save the page and look at it in View mode.

Very excited to see some of the updates coming forth. Is there an expected time frame or release we can be on the look for this?


Thanks for raising this Alex & thanks for the update Eric. 

Committed

Aprimo has received feedback from many customers regarding this particular topic.  I know of many more customers who would vote on this Idea if they new it was here.  Based on this we have been evaluating alternative options for handling the "Required" field designation and have a new design we plan to implement.

We will be placing a "Required" indicator tab next to each required field on the page when it is initially loaded and does not have a value.  As shown in the screenshot below.  This will make seeing what fields are required very obvious and easy for the users to notice.  

However, we know if showed this all the time it would also make the page very busy.  Therefore, once a user selects a value for a required field the "Required" indicator will be hidden on the page.  This way as the user completes the page they will be able to visual see which fields are still missing that require an entry.  As shown on the Lifestyle Segment field.  In the top screen shot it has the "Required" indicator when <not selected>.  In the below screen shot, a value of Youth has been picked so the "Required" indicator has been hidden.


This work is assigned to a team.  Development should begin later this quarter with a goal to release in March or April.  We want this change in place well before the New Field Restyling feature become activated for all customers in June to give customer time to train their users on how the pages will look once that is activated.

Eric, this is great news. Can we expect to see non-required fields to be "blank" or will they still be labeled as optional?

Hi Eric, 

Following up on the above question. If I remember correctly, you mentioned that required fields will be labeled as required and non-required fields are going to be labeled as optional. How will read-only fields be treated? Today we are seeing them being labeled as optional however, we'd like to ensure we're not labeling those fields since there is no action needed from the user.

While I absolutely love the new, clean look of styling for the campaign fields and just overall look of the page, I think the page has gotten a little too clean.  I have to agree with both Alex and Christine that there is no longer a distinct difference between required and non-required fields and this has a huge potential for creating user confusion.

We have been testing it also and run into the same issues.

Users are also confused because required EA’s look the same as read only EA’s.

I agree with Alex's comments.  As I have been testing out the New Field Restyling in our Sandbox, I am noticing there is no real standout as to what the required fields are.  Our users look for the recd asterisk.  This will for sure cause confusion to our users.