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 are looking for the Nintex roadmap, you can find that on Nintex Community

If you have questions about Nintex Ideas, please contact

If you require support, please visit Nintex Customer Central

If you have a sales inquiry, please contact

Status Open for voting
Categories General
Created by Michelle Pavel
Created on Nov 1, 2019

Modify Ownership & User Rights Report to Include Process Writers not Editors of Groups

We are trying to track who is actually writing processes (published and unpublished) and there is no report that shows that or dashboard view for the Promaster. We can export to show process editors but it is useless and only shows editors of a group not processes, and those people have the rights to approve a process - not sure why a process editor would have the rights to approve a process.

Our writers do not approve the process. Only the SME & Owner is responsible for that.

Therefore, we have no way to report on who is actually writing a process, except looking at the Change Log, without manually going through it.

Could there be an opportunity to include the writer information from the Change log into this report because they technically do not fit the Promapp definition of Process Editor.

Do you guys have similar problems with this definition or even use it?

Could it be useful for you to know who are writing processes?

  • Attach files
  • Kerry Hiki
    Sep 7, 2022
    Thanks for the suggestion. I agree it would be beneficial to capture who is editing processes and how often.
    Right now you can use the Process Change Log report - this is at a group level and will list all change log entries over the period you set for all processes in a group.
    Given the availability of this report your suggestion isn't a priority right now, but we'll monitor interest for this idea going forward. Thanks!