When workflows are implemented and executed in Fusion Manage, user needs to select the name of the assignee/reviewer amog the full users list. In a company with more than 100 users, one person might not know the one which will follow in the process, but the workflow will need to be executed anyway. It would be strongly needed to implement the "Role" based wf execution: tasks should be assigned to roles, not to people. That's different from security roles, where we setup the access permissions. Role should be an indipendent field to be defined and a user should be able to participate in many roles. A role might also have a leader. At the same time, in wf definition, an administrator should be able to decide wether a task needs to be performed by "any" user belonging to a certain role or by "all" users belonging to the same role.   Show More

we should be able to see what transitions were executed by a delegate. currently a report or view will only show the action performed by the original user that was on the record not the delegation.  Show More

For releasing an Item, you have to create a CO and then you can change the Lifecycle from the Item. It doesn't matter if this is "Under Development" or "Production". Item Lifecycle can only be changed with CO. This controlls, that affected Items are properly changed and they are under control revision.   However, Busniess is busy. It can happen, that you addd Task to Users, and add Items. Tasks can be controlled with Condition and Validation Scripts. If something is pending, a specific Workflow is not possible.   But now, it is pssible to go forward until the end without having a Lifeceyle on the Item. If you now "Release" the CO, you well get an Message that is usless for the User. It failed; yes I can see it. The process is not going forward. Not very helpful. Only as Admin you can see in the Error Log, that it has failed because Lifecyle is missing.   It would be helpful, if a Workflow transition can check if a Lifecyle is null.    User training is good, a smart Workflow checkt would be better. Show More

My idea is the following: It is possible to introduce project planning with phases, workflows, tasks, teams and persons in FLC. Once all this is implemented, the step to resource planning of people and teams is only a small step. How could we use a combination of FLC tasks and Microsoft Outlook appointments and tasks to create an agile and easy to use resource planning? How could we send FLC tasks to a Microsoft Outlook Exchange Server via a workflow action and synchronize them back when appointments are moved?   Is there already a possible solution here? Is there already an implementation guide here? With which interface (FLC REST API, Microsoft Graph, Office 365 APIs, Outlook REST API (v2.0) etc.) can we create a task? ) could this idea be implemented?   Show More

Hi,   For information, I use the classic UI and I don’t know if this problem is also in the MUI.   There is a problem when an action notification is set up in a transition just before a state where a reminder notification is defined. When the reminder is launched (every X days), the action notification linked to the transition before is also launched again. We already noticed that the end of the transition, where the arrow is, the destination point is the reference for the transition. Normally, the normal feature is to have the email on the action notification ONLY when the transition is played and not when another trigger which happened after the transition is played.   For example: I have created an object in a workspace where the workflow is the following one:   IMPORTANT: there is a reminder notification every day on the state “Technical Review” to ask to the approvers to do their work 😊   In the state “Created” I have added an Action notification on the transition “Submit for Review”:   When I submit my object, I receive an email, which is totally normal as I have created an action notification on this transition. But, if the approvers in the step “Technical Review” do not do their job in less than 1 day, I will receive an email notification every day even if I am not one of the approvers of the state “Technical Review”. Could you please fix this problem? Thanks Sylvain Show More

Hi,   In the Autodesk University event in London I saw that the default workflow of a change order is the following one (see attachment “As-Is.png”). I was surprised to see customers taking photos of this default workflow at the AU London. To be sure that we are aligned, the change order is for me, the validation of a modification which is contained in a change request. In the Autodesk Fusion Lifecycle workflow, we can have only one lock. In the default workflow of the CO, the lock is in the state “Fast Track”. Case 1: If the owner submits the CO to the Fast Track, the CO and its content (affected items) are frozen, they can’t be modified. It this what the Autodesk users want because when something is launched to the approval process, we want that the first approver checks the same thing that the last approver also checks, if there are more than one person in the “Fast Track” state. Case 2: If the owner submits the CO to the “CCB Review” (because 2 stages are needed), the content is not frozen and can be modified at any time. If we have 2 persons in the “CCB Review”, approver 1 can check and sign a different thing to approver 2. Additionally, the content can be modified in the “Implementation” state after the “CCB Review” state. The configuration is frozen only when the CO is in the “Approve” state. So lot of things can happened between the submit state and the approve state. I suggest having the following default workflow in the Change Order workspace to avoid mistakes, problems for the Autodesk users (see attachment “To-Be.png”). With this workflow, we can keep the two different paths: When the owner submits the CO, people in stage 1 can check the CO and its content. The content is frozen because the lock is on the “CCB Review”. - If the owner puts people in stage 2 before submitting it to the “CCB Review”, the last person in the “CCB Review” have only the option to send the CO to the “Implementation” stage or reject the CO (condition script). - If nobody was added at stage 2, the last approver in the “CCB Review” state only has the option to send the CO to the “Approve” stage or reject the CO (condition script).   It is more secure I think. At the beginning of our project we had the default workflow and our experience shows us that some modifications can be done on the items affected in the CO and cause lot of problem. If you want, I can give you the associated scripts if you want to include the update to FLC. I know that some of default scripts must be modified.   Cheers, Sylvain Show More

We frequently make use of a closed loop transition in combination with the escalation function to create a scheduler. Very often, we run this once per day which soon clutters up the workflow history making searching for more valid transitions difficult. In the example below you can see the transition called Scheduler has run in succession for 4 days. They can in reality run for much longer than this which just clutters the workflow history with irrelevant information.     What would be ideal would be ability for admin to suppress certain transitions from the workflow history. There still has the be a way of ensuring the scheduler is still running so perhaps allow admin only to see these transitions but suppress from the normal user? Alternatively, allow the user to filter the transitions that they want to see at the top of the workflow history.  Show More

it would be wicked cool if there was a Place to add notes anytime during the approval process. for example when you approve the a CO there is a spot to place comments, but once you save the step you cannot add anymore comments. we should be able to add comments anytime. even after we approve the CO.   Show More

It would be useful to be able to copy the workflow in a workspace and paste directly to a MS Word/MS Visio etc. document. This would assist with procedural requirements our business or when creating training materials. Currently the only option open to us is to use the print screen function which has limitations. Show More

Let me avoid needing some simple validation scripts. On a transition, I want to select the fields that must be completed before this transition. This would make more efficient workflow definition. See the mockup picture below.     Show More

Hello Fusion 360 Manage users,   I would like to make a suggestion for the UI of the validation messages. Currently, long messages are not having any line breaks, and you have to scroll far right to read the message. See this example:   So what I would like to suggest is, maybe adding line breaks in this panel. So instead of scrolling to read the message it would appear completely without scrolling. (I am using the latest version of Mozilla Firefox, but the behaviour is the same in Google Chrome)     Greeting, Patrick Show More

It would be useful to be able to click on any workflow state in the map to see who can perform each transition, not just the current state. Show More

It would be smoking hot if when you select the Workflow State the Approvers and/or Final Approvers were listed on Top and the Cancel/ Reject list are on the Bottom.   99% of my users are always confused when they select the State of a Workflow and can't tell who are the approvers because they just simply didn't scroll far enough. its more of a training issue, but to me it seems like this is very odd that the Cancel and reject boxes are before the approvers in the States of a workflow.    Below I numbered these in the Fasion that makes more sense to me...    Show More

We all know that the workflow actions/notifications can be delegated by setting a delegation in Delegation Manager. This way of setting up delegation is applicable for future workflow actions/notifications only. How about existing workflow actions? This is where I believe On Demand Delegation comes into handy. We are currently on Teamcenter and we are in the process of moving to PLM 360. Teamcenter has On Demand delegation feature and is widely used in our organization. We believe that On Demand delegation would be great feature which can improve the user experience in PLM 360. Could it be implemented in PLM 360?   Thanks, Madhav   Show More

Hello, I watched the Essential Skills: WorkSpace, WorkFlow, Navigation, and Manage users and permisions and they all were demonstrating skills on a version of PLM that doesn't resemble the current version. My Idea is to upload videos that are demonstrating how to perform the exxential skills on a current version of PLM. Show More