WorkfrontReviews of workfront.com

Questions about ProofHQ 'guest' proofers and copying previous projects with these guests. LEAP App works great - was happy to know it was ready to use. I was able to find a breakfast for Admins that I would not have been aware of if I hadn't joined the community. Excited for LEAP 2019.

Workfront has so many features that allow for integration!

I had implemented four work management solutions prior to Workfront. Where Workfront stood out at at first glance was robust functionality, flexibility and scalability. As our use evolved, from a single department implementation to cross-organization implementation with multi-platform integration, the level of support and accessibility from the Workfront team and the Workfront user community is not something I've seen anywhere else. This level of support and events like LEAP and local user group meetings play a huge role in the ongoing evolution of our WF instance so that it is a 'living' thing that matches the evolution of our organization.

Workfront has made a real difference in our project management. We now have visibility to all projects that are being worked on. When I run into issues, the Workfront team is quick to respond and help me resolve any issues. I would recommend Workfront to help manage workflow within any company.

The application requires much customization by Admin profile in order to get the user interface and functionality shown during customized sales demos. We've been setting the application up for 3 months and are still customizing views/reports/layouts... The help desk is good with hints/tricks and quick responses, however some items they can't help with. OOTB settings can not be edited - such as default expense types. For worker licences, once formatted views and reports are set then it should be fine for them, however that process takes much longer than expected. I anticipate that the customization will continue for some time and perhaps continuously as the tool evolves.

On the one hand, I have not experienced a better electronic proofing solution. On the other, still much more time-consuming and prone to error than old-fashioned printed paper proofs. There are many great features, you know about those, here is the not-so-great: The worst problem is extreme latency which occurs far too often, many times a week, and when it happens, it often recurs for hours at a time. I click on something, then it freezes for minutes sometimes ten minutes, before I can do anything, even continue scrolling. Second worse is the the lack of control when navigating multiple corrections marked on many different pages in one comment—we call them "spiderwebs". We often mark the same correction on dozens of pages as our files have multiple versions of the same letter. The interface ALWAYS zooms out to show ALL the "spider links" on every page, causing us to need to zoom back in on one in order to read anything or even to identify the page it points to. This feature is important but needs great improvement. 1. The ability to disable the Zoom-out and have the interface just take us to the first occurrence at a 100% zoom. 2. The ability to quickly jump to the next occurrence without having to zoom out and then back in. 3. The ability to use the multiple-selection "spiderwebs" with TEXT corrections, not just boxes and highlights—most of our text corrections occur on multiple pages and so editors cannot use the text tool or "replace with" text features when they need to mark multiple pages, which is most of the time. ADDING MARKUP TO EXISTING COMMENTS—very frustrating and limiting that one cannot use any of the commenting tools to ADD to an existing comment-to say "no, do not change THAT text that was marked, instead change THIS text on the next page" and be able to point to the instance. We have to crate a NEW comment to do that, which is very confusing as we will now have multiple, conflicting comments. IN PROOFHQ (WORKFRONT PROOF), THE LACK OF BASIC STYLING (rich text) in the comments makes it so inconvenient to mark bold and italic etc. in text corrections that none of our editors even attempt to indicate correct text styling anymore. This often results in additional correction rounds to mark up bold and italic in body text. Please add rich text to comments. So annoying that in the the html5 version of ProofHQ one cannot MAKE A COMMENT AND MARK IT DONE IN ONE WINDOW—this worked FINE in the Flash version, but now I have to first make the comment, then post, which closes it, then find the new comment in the comment list and reopen it just to mark it done. I ALWAYS need to make a comment, execute the correction myself and mark it done all at one time. PLEASE restore the “Done button” (and the other actions) to the NEW COMMENT window and don’t make us POST the comment and then reopen it before marking it done. TAGGING OTHER USERS who are not scheduled to access the proof yet—I often need to leave a comment for a reviewer who will not have access to the proof until it is their turn, which will be several days after my turn… If I try to tag them they are not available in Proof HQ for tagging. If I add them to the stage to be able to tag them, then they are tempted (and able) to access the proof out-of-turn and disrupt our workflow. NEED TO BE ABLE TO TAG ANYONE AT ANY TIME and a way to CHOOSE BETWEEN REQUIRING AN IMMEDIATE ANSWER FROM THEM (as it is now) OR TO DEFER THEIR NOTIFICATION and ability to access the proof until it is their turn (stage). REQUIRES THE SAME MANUAL CHANGES TO SETTINGS EVERY TIME I UPLOAD A NEW VERSION. So absurd that for every upload of a proof in ProofHQ (Workfront Proof) I need to make the same redundant changes to the settings — this is automation??? 1. Name of proof version. We do need to change the name of the proof as it moves to a different MAJOR stage, but we do not want the proof to be named with the PSFs’s name. We want it to retain the SAME NAME for a proof during the whole stage. But it defaults to the PDF name (we never want that) so I have to change the proof name on every upload. 2. Workflow—we always use the same workflow for a particular job, but Workfront ALWAYS defaults to “-with parent version changes”—that is a setting we NEVER use. So for EVERY upload, I need to change the Workflow each time. OMG. 3. Idiotic stage diagram — what the heck is this for—it is of absolutely no use to us, yet the stage diagram floats over the upload window, obscuring important info and requiring me to hide the stage diagram each time (which today I cannot even do—it won’t hide today) 4. Recipients - I have to change the Proof role of the recipients every time I upload a new version—why doesn’t it know/remember what role people are supposed to have?They each have the same role every time but it never defaults to the correct role. Two years of waiting and still Workfront and ProofHQ are not integrated at our company and show different deadlines in each for the same stage of the same job. Apparently Workfront’s inability to accommodate our company’s workflows prevents full integration. Still have to mark tasks complete in BOTH places, doing double work. Neither is linked to our time-entry system Webvantage so triple work really as I have to enter time in a different system. Frustrating that there are no links in ProofHQ (Workfront Proof) and Workfront to access the same job, I have to search for things in Workfront or ProofHQ even though I have the job open in the other application.

I used Workfront at my former job and liked it so much that I badgered my current employer into implementing it. I've often said that I couldn't do my job without Workfront so I'm thrilled to be getting back into it. While Workfront can be a bit of a struggle to get the hang of at first, I've found it to be far superior to any project management alternatives I've explored.

Workfront is a very intuitive and easy-to-use tool. It has fields and information already by default but many times it becomes very limiting because even when you can customize fields you can not do for example a "% planned advance" field to compare against "% completed". Sometimes making formulated fields becomes very complicated because it does not accept some formulas. The Ipad APP is a very defined executive report, which does not allow you to configure the information you need or want to see (for example different information fields such as custom fields)