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
Desired Behavior:
When transferring ownership of processes from one user to another, the state of each process (published/unpublished) should be preserved. Unpublished processes should remain unpublished after the transfer.
Current Behavior:
Currently, all unpublished processes assigned to User1 will be published automatically when transferring all assinged processes to User2.
Ideal Solution:
Processes retain their current state when transfered through the UI.
Historic Notes:
Whenever someone leaves the organisation or changes role there is no way to bulk transfer a processes still in development to a new resource without the process automatically being published which then bypasses the approvals process. We are a small organisation and have at least one person join and leave a week. To review all of the processes to see if they are ready for publishing would be an administration nightmare.
The system needs to be able to be able handle transfering a process in a development status to the new resource with the same status, and not be automatically published.
I'm glad this issue has been so succinctly and aptly described...
It's such a bizarre behaviour that in order to transfer ownership it forces the process to be published (including any pending updates and changes). This means instead of the pending changes going to the new for review and approval Process Owner or Expert, the Promaster is inadvertently approving and publishing the changes.
This is a flaw, Kerry, not really a "scenario to consider".
This is a great scenario to consider and I agree requiring a publish for ownership transfer isn't ideal if there are changes not ready for publishing.
I've marked this down to look at as part of our delegation of approval changes as the themes are similar, and we'll also monitor voting on this idea from other clients.
The current global publishing when transferring Process Ownership does not make sense, and leads to an incorrect audit trail which suggests the new owner had approved the processes.
This is especially inaccurate if the process is in draft and then we transfer ownership, the process is automatically and approved and published giving the new owner no opportunity to review, approve or decline it.
Its not until the process is published that the new owner/expert can see the process and the process is moved to the new group.
We are now getting these frequently and its becoming time consuming.
This got me into trouble by many process stewards, and I had to restore several processes back to the proper previously published versions. I won't be using this feature again until there is either a configuration item to turn it off or it's changed permanently.
Ivan