Support for pop-up confirmation on workflow actions

[sten]

I could be really nice if PLM supported some kind of pop-up confirmation on workflow actions.

Something like:

 [ "Did you forget to list test equipment used?"  YES   NO ]

If the user clicks yes, the workflow action is performed, if the user clicks no it cancles the workflow action.

Since it is possible that no test equipment was used I can't use a Validation script, but since 90% of the cases there will be test equipment it could be nice to remind the user if it is empty.

I could see this being very useful in creating a more user friendly and foolproof system.

[gasevsm]

interesting ask. I'm guessing a code section in your validation script is dedicated for checking if certain fields are empty that abort the wf action. I am assuming these fields of interest are not marked with required field validation, per se. rather they seem necessary for that wf action to complete. let's explore this a bit further. how do you see an approach of providing the user with opportnuity to insert missing values that would otherwise be flagged as invalid via the validation script in context of performing a wf action? the user enters them and proceed with the workflow; validation script re-validates what it needs and executes the transition. thoughts on this experience?  I am not solutioning, merely trying to understand the problem better.  right now, i read that people forget to fill in needed values and user is urged to try wf action, realize something's missing, go back to item details to update, and repeat wf action.  the need as I read it is one of optimizing this use case.  can you clarify further please if I'm off base? Thanks in advance,

[sten]

> ... I am assuming these fields of interest are not marked with required field validation, per se. rather they seem 

>>   necessary for that wf action to complete.

Exactly. They are optional fields. I cannot but in a firm "required" field validation. I want to avoid the user leaving them blank or incorrect by accident. In my example this is a field that contains the list the MTE ID's used (Measurement and Test Equipment). Since it is possible that none were used, I cannot make it required, but if it was used it is important to add them in (90% of the time).

Secondly I would want to use this to remind the user to double check an important field to make sure it is correct. It could be a field that experience shows is often filled in incorrectly.

Validation scripts cannot be used because it cannot determined from the context if the field is correct or needed. Only the user knows.

Really no different from the delete file confirmation a windows computer gives you. Maybe you wanted to delete the file!!! The computer really can't tell.

Right now I only see two options:

Option 1: Create two workflow actions 1) "Proceed" (NO MTE) and 2) "Proceed" (w/MTE). That way the user has to make a consious choice and each of these actions could have their own validation script. I don't like the solution because it clutters up the workflow and make it more confusing.

Option 2: Create a checkbox field where the user must select "No MTE". This works in the example I quoted, but does not give me the ability to ask the user in a pop-up prompt: "Are you sure the MTE is correct?". This works for a field accidently left empty, but cannot be used to ensure an important field is correct.

>> let's explore this a bit further. how do you see an approach of providing the user with opportnuity

>> to insert missing values that would otherwise be flagged as invalid via the validation script in

>> context of performing a wf action?

I am just proposing a simple solution. A friendly reminder pop-up prompt that requires the user to select YES or NO to a customizable question, for example: "Are you sure no MTE was used ?" YES/NO.

On a YES the workflow action proceeds the way it is done today. No NO the action is aborted. On NO it is then the users responsiblity to correct the record and try again.

I see this to be very unintrusive if the user is already doing everything correctly.

>> ....  right now, i read that people forget to fill in needed values and user is urged to try wf action,

>>     realize something's missing, go back to item details to update, and repeat wf action.  the need

>>     as I read it is one of optimizing this use case.  can you clarify further please if I'm off base?

The only way I see this being addressed with use case modification is to insert dummy workflow actions or workflow steps. I don't like that solution because it makes the workflows more confusing and intrusive, and would have to be explained to every user.

[nguyentru]

Hi Sten,

This is an interesting idea, we appreciate you taking the time to submit it on the Idea Station.

While we can't promise that your diea will be implemented, we will be sure that our product team reviews your submission.

We will keep this idea on file, and revisit in the future.

Thank you,

Trung

[benderk]

Thank you for submitting your idea. Have you tried the Modern Interface lately? We request that you review your idea in the context of the Modern interface. If your idea is not addressed, we invite you to create a new Idea in the context of Modern so that it can be addressed accordingly. Sincerely, Keri Bender | Global GTM Business Strategy Manager, Product Lifecycle Management