Skip to Main Content
Nintex Ideas

đź‘‹ Use this site to provide feedback and ideas for all Nintex Products. See our post on Nintex Community "Welcome to Nintex Ideas" for more details on Nintex Ideas, how an idea is handled by our product teams and more!


If you have questions about Nintex Ideas, please contact ideas@nintex.com

If you require support, please visit Nintex Customer Central

If you have a sales inquiry, please contact sales@nintex.com

Status Under Review
Categories General
Created by Guest
Created on Jun 16, 2020

Improved Functionality for Transitioning Processes between Owner/Experts

In order to better support transitions in process ownership, whether they are published or in development, I propose the following functionality be added.
Break the Publish Now feature for Promaster's into 3 separate functions/Button.

1. Transition O/E- This button would function to transition groups of processes not yet published between owners and experts. It would transition only it would NOT publish. Maintaining process approval structure and not signaling the original owner.

2. Transition Publish- This button would transition groups of processes that may be in an additional layer of update or development. It would republish the process as an increase of 1 version level, without publishing the differences. It would only change Owners and Experts to show updated in Promapp and would allow processes that have been published at least 1 time, but are in development to complete system approvals. It would retain this information with the new owner/experts publishing the change. This would not send an approval request to the owner/expert. This would be used in the event of unexpected staff changes.

3. Publish Now 2.0 - With the other two options completed for any transitions, the new Publish now, would still require acquire approval but the Promaster could designate whether it is publishing as a full updated version, or publishing as current version with updated owners/experts increasing the version by 1 number, without publishing updates. Those updates to the process would still be retained by the system and follow an organizations approval process.

The hope in separating this functionality, it will make it easier to transition processes ownership, without losing those in development and better supporting approval processes across different orgs.
  • Attach files
  • Guest
    Reply
    |
    Sep 7, 2022
    With one additional Proviso, the adjustment or transition of the processes should be independent of the review date. Allowing review dates to carry forward with the Promaster uses this button.
  • Noala Degasperis
    Reply
    |
    Sep 7, 2022
    Whilst our organization doesn't use the approval workflow, being able to change process owner or expert without a map re-publishing would be useful functionality for us.
  • Guest
    Reply
    |
    Sep 7, 2022
    it would definitely be a welcomed improvement to be able to change Owner/Expert without having to republish the whole process to get the system to recognise the new owner/expert. It would also be good to be able to add additional approvers to a published process that is undergoing amendments and have the system recognise the additional approvers approval is required on the amendments, rather than the system only recognise the additional approvers after the newer version has been published - currently we have to manually chase up the additional approvers with a minimode link to get them to review prior to us starting the PAW.
  • Kerry Hiki
    Reply
    |
    Sep 7, 2022
    Thanks for the suggestion. We don't have this change on our near term road map, but it is under consideration as a future change.
  • Guest
    Reply
    |
    Sep 7, 2022
    I agree with Loren's statement that it would be great if addititional approvers would need to review the version where they are added as additional approvers instead of only after the newer version has been published.
    Practically speaking, and also from an audit trail it makes alot more sense.
  • Guest
    Reply
    |
    Sep 7, 2022
    Can you not already do this by the transfer function under user accounts?
  • Jules
    Reply
    |
    Sep 7, 2022
    Our organisation doesn't use the approval workflow, but totally agree with the idea as upversioning for the sake of changing editor rights not only rapidly and unnecessarily increases the version number, but also risks changes being published that are not yet ready
  • Guest
    Reply
    |
    Sep 7, 2022
    Update the owner/expert of a process without causing version change.
  • Kerry Hiki
    Reply
    |
    Sep 7, 2022
    This feature is not planned for in our near term roadmap at this stage, however we'll continue to monitor interest, and update the status of this idea as our plans change.