FORUM POSTS AND DISCUSSIONS | Previously known as Promapp
- 401 Topics
- 927 Replies
Wondering how others manage the situation where there are instances of duplicate named individuals? We used a workaround recommended within another thread where we add an initial /identifer after the users first name. However due to us being a large company with a high level of staff change we use an automated import script to add and remove users , and recently established the script is overwriting where we have applied these initials/identifiers . This is as you can imagine incurring an admin burden in having to reapply the initals, otherwise our users cannot identify the correct user when assigning individuals to processes etc…. I have created an idea on the ideas forum to consider adding an initial / identifier field to user accounts , If anyone is experiencing the same issue here is a link to vote on - Add a initial /identifier field to user account | Nintex Ideas
Hi, I’m doing a restructure of our process groups and finding that we have a lot of documents that do not have associated processes but are associated with a group. Does this mean they are not linked to a process and therefore can be deleted? I’ve seen previous questions regarding associated processes for reporting and it was an error happening so just want to make sure it’s not an error first. Thanks
Hello,I’m wondering whether I can please pick your brains? I have set up a new user in Process Manager but when that team member tries to log in by using our SSO mechanism, the following error number pops up:“AADSTS50105: Your administrator has configured the application Nintex Promapp [xxxxxx] to block users unless they are specifically granted ('assigned') access to the application.”Have you experienced this before?Thanks, I appreciate any feedback.Regards,Carlos
HiHow do we get the process approval to move to the correct approver?We have a process map that is still in draft form - it has not yet been published (eg version 0.13).We have the process approval module, the draft process was saved and sent for approval.Subsequently, we identified the listed owner was incorrect, so edited the process which withdraws the approval submission, updated to the owner, and then resubmitted it for approval.The RACI shows the correct owner, as in the one we updated it to, however for some reason the process has been resubmitted with the original owner for approval, and this is visible in the change log.The group the process sits in does not have a champion listed, nor approver tagged to the group.I have invalidated the process and group cache, however the ‘processes for approval’ tab shows the process is still sitting with the person originally listed as approver. The originally listed owner has no interest or desire to approve this on behalf of the new (and
Is there a method of disconnecting a glossary term when it appears out of context? TO and CAN are used in our business for Traffic Officer and Commercial Advice Note. sadly, “to” and “can” are frequently used in Task and Activity text and do not relate to the glossary terms in question, however, they will still be underlined because they are seen as a glossary term.When such an issue occurs with a SYSTEM, they can be unlinked so they do not show. ie - we use software called Share and Confirm, but if these verbs are used in an task or activity description, they can be unlinked from the systems of the same name.Why is a similar function not available with glossary terms? It is causing us a real headache
I have a group champion with Business Analysis Privileges and when she opens a process that has pending feedback listed on dashboard, she opens to reply and waits but the button showing it is still unresolved never displays? She can’t figure out which feedback requires a response/resolution Has anyone else had this problem?
It would be very helpful to know what people are searching for and what results they are getting to be able to know that people are finding the processes they need. Has anyone found a way to do this? Is it buried in the system somewhere? It looks like this has been submitted as an idea (click here to see it & vote), but I’m hoping someone has found a workaround or something!
Hi, I have discovered that the review date for risks appears to update each time the risk or it’s corresponding treatment is edited rather than being based off creation or last reviewed date. This is interesting as for processes, the process review date remains fixed when processes are edited and still stems from the created date unless it is manually changed.Is there a way for the risk review date to remain stable? or for it to be manually changed?
Hi,I'm hoping someone can help. I'm not a SharePoint guru but I can follow instructions 😂I've followed the steps listed in the help link below down to step 3, but when I test the query, I didn't get any results, (I've waited a couple of hours in case there was some kind of sync issue, but that didn't help) so I didn't continue to create a dedicated search results page etc. https://help.nintex.com/en-US/promapp/Admin/SharePoint/SharePointOnlineSearch.htmDoes anybody have any tips?ThanksTania
We really want to use the acknowledgements feature in Process Manager, but ran into a few concerns:The email is really generic, comes from an external address, and calls everything a process even if it’s a policy… how did you get past this? Or was it a non-issue? Perhaps it will be customizable in the future (click to vote on this idea)... Every process owner can switch on acknowledgements for a process, and if that process includes an activity for “all staff,” spam the whole company with acknowledgement emails. Has anyone experienced this? Maybe it could be restricted to just Promasters (click to vote on this idea)…I’d love to learn from your experience! Please share how you’ve used the acknowledgements and your success/challenges.
Hello dear Nintex community,I’ve recently came across a ‘challenge’ when trying to share minimode links with our causal staff - via the insertion of these in training courses available in our internal LMS).These courses in particular are intended for all our production staff which includes ‘casuals’. We hire hundreds of casuals every year due to the nature of our cyclic business. Because this type of staff by definition will only remain employed in a temporary fashion, we do not create company e-mail addresses for them.However, they do have login credentials to access our LMS which they can do even from their personal mobiles.As you may imagine, this creates a challenge when they try to access a minimode link to processes which have been included in these training courses, i.e. the access is simply denied as they are not exactly within our organisation environment.I know I could disable the “Require user authentication for access to minimode links of restricted processes” restriction,
An area of our business is an independent auditor who audits our own organisation, as well as other similar organisations (competitors). Although we still need the staff in that ‘group’ to access HR, finance, IT and corporate processes, we do not want them accessing (e.g.) operations processes. Firstly, they may see something (accidentally or otherwise) that will make them focus attention during a future audit. Secondly, having access to those processes could undermine their position as an ‘independent’ auditor in the eyes of our competitors and leave us exposed.Using the Process Group Permissions, it’s relatively simple to restrict viewing access to just those (@20 staff) within that group, but it looks like I will have to remove ALL STAFF from every other group in the organisation, then individually add the other @1200 staff to every group, making sure that I don’t include those who are in the auditing group.Does anyone know of a better way to do this?
Hi,Has anyone had any experience with the Improvements add-on, in particular the ‘form field’ “location”? Only being able to allocate one person as the portfolio manager who can assign, approve and close an incident is not ideal so, I am using the location field to be able to allocate more people to work through the incident. Has anyone used the location field for other details besides location?
Specifiying locations for activities with roles of the same name but situated in different office location
How is it best to go about specifiying a role location for activities in a process? For example, a Business Analyst in Canada performs activity A, then a Business Analyst in France performs activity B, and so on.The role name is Business Analyst, should there be a responsibility for each of the locations? Should the location only be specified as a note? Should a role be created for each location (e.g. Business Analyst - Canada”, “Business Analyst - France”)?
We have processes where there are legitimately two experts. I do not believe this is possible now, but can it please be added as an enhancement? It is not just that we want multiple staff to be able to edit the process, which can be achieved by Process Editor, but to identify more than one SME.
Process Manager – Process Modeling Customer Beta We're excited to advise that later this week Process Manager customers will now be able to build and manage BPMN 2.0 compliant process models within Nintex Process Manager. Initially available as a “beta” feature to existing Process Manager customers, Process Modeling will enable teams to build more dynamic process documentation using BPMN within Process Manager and alongside their existing documented processes. Nintex Process Manager (formerly Promapp) has been the preferred central process repository for line of business teams, especially those with centers of excellence and dedicated to continual improvement. Process Manager will continue to provide these teams with an easy-to-use text-based process documentation capability, that delivers the straightforward, consistent, and easy-to-understand process maps they require. With the introduction of Process Modeling and BPMN, we expect that IT and Operations teams will want to start leve
Hi,I’ve added an idea to bring the Undo buttons to other screens, not just the Procedure tab, so that any changes can easily be undone.For example, where a trigger or input/output is changed and there is a need to revert the change.If you think this would be a useful improvement, feel free to give it a vote via this link Add undo button to all of the edit screens (not just | Nintex IdeasEddie.
Hello,In terms of the %of process views measurement in the central dashboard (or Company dashboard - as opposed to “My Dashboard”), is there any known ‘ideal’ parameter to measure this against?For instance, if processes for a particular department are showing say 50% or 75% or 100% views in relation to the previous month, how can this number be interpreted? i.e. For a department of 25 staff and say 30 published processes, if those were actually viewed 5 times this month and in the next one we get 100% in the above ratio, perhaps that is not a good outcome in terms of engagement?I guess my other question is what would be a good baseline or indicator of an acceptable level of engagement? (process views wise)Hope the above makes sense.Thanks,Carlos
Hi,The information in the help section, vs the how-to centre vs what I have experienced with minimode links is conflicting. Nintex Help Says:Minimode links update every time a process is published. That means a link to an unpublished process will show the current version until the process is published. When sharing a "0.xx" version process, the process version gets updated to 1.1 version, and that same minimode link shows the newer version.Links generated for published processes behave the same way, but allow users to switch between the last published version and the current in-progress process.In either case, once the process is published (or published again) a new minimode link will be needed to view the current state of the process. For more information, see Minimode configuration. The How-to Centre Says:How do Nintex Promapp minimode links for published, unpublished, and in-progress processes work?Minimode links have different behavior depending on their publishing status:Unpublish
Login to the community
Login with SSOLogin with Saml2
Enter your username or e-mail address. We'll send you an e-mail with instructions to reset your password.