nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Idea: Assignment feature for Approval groups

David_Wieseneck

When a company has multiple lawyers (including outsource legal for contract Overflow), it’s a bit confusing to figure out who is working on what workflow.

I would love to see an assignment feature within a group, instead of just defaulting to one user in that group (Referring to Review section of WFD)

- Round-robin style assignment

- Ability for a group member to mark a workflow as being worked on and claim the assignment

Find more posts tagged with

Status: None

Comments

Alfie_Thackeray

I second the need for round-robin style assignment!

Would be great to see if this could be somewhat smarter, and allocate round-robin on number of workflows that are in progress.

Crystal_Wu

Love this + ability to set conditionality or random for the assignment rather than dependant on a launch field. This is a great product feedback.

David_Wieseneck

Thanks for the ❤️ @Crystal_Wu

Joe_Nguyen

(No content)

Laurel_Palluzi

I'd also love this feature to include a "locked" type functionality so that no one can download or send the document while someone is in the middle of working on it (commenting okay, but no external sharing).

David_Wieseneck

Good call!

Edgar_Salas

@David_Wieseneck did you get any traction?

David_Wieseneck

@Edgar_Salas No yet 😞 but we got 16 thumbs up votes. Let’s get more!

Liam_Bracken

I think this feature is really needed. Lots of teams don't have anyone who has enough oversight of everyone else's workloads to be able to assign onwards in the way Ironclad seems to envisage.

For high volume agreement types like NDAs, defaulting to one "Default User" places a big burden on one person in the team to deal with it or find someone else who can. Having the workflow owner select from a list is also not ideal as we want the lawyer with the most capacity at the time to pick it up.

It would be great to be able to have the option of workflows being "unassigned" until they are actively picked up by someone (or even randomly assigned as suggested above).

There is a thread which suggests creating a "placeholder" user to mark workflows as unassigned (https://community.ironcladapp.com/t5/Ironclad-Users-Forum/Question-for-multi-lawyer-teams/m-p/1757), but this feels a really sub-optimal solution.

jeremy_ball

FULLY AGREE - and I've raised an idea with our team's suggestion, here:
https://community.ironcladapp.com/t5/Ironclad-Idea-Exchange/Notify-entire-Group-on-Approval-assignment/idi-p/8070#M1042

Zach_McKenzie

My team has found a good workaround to support this function that I will explain below.

Setup:

Review Step:
- We have a Contracts Admin user who is a paralegal on our legal team. We have Review settings set up as below. So anytime the contract is updated, our Contracts Admin is emailed and required as an approver.
- For each approval that needs to take place (Legal, Finance, etc.), we added an additional Approver review within the same Approval Step and set this to be assigned manually, which then starts a form question.
Create Step (Launch Form):
- We created a "Modify Contract Admin Settings" (Yes/No) property and defaulted the value to "No". This shows up at the bottom of our Launch Form.
- When that question is changed to "Yes", a condition called "Modify Contract Admin Settings = Yes" is triggered to show the following questions.
- We create a Yes/No property attached to each Approver (Finance, Legal, etc.) and default the answer to "No". We also create a new condition called "___ Approver = Yes" to show the Assignment question (created from the "Assigned Manually" step above) when the condition applies.

In Use:

When draft documents are updated to and saved as a new version (either by redlines upload or redlines edit in Ironclad Editor), our Contracts Admin is notified and set as the next Approver. They then determine which Approvers need to be included in the review.
The Contracts Admin goes to the workflow in question and clicks "Edit"
This opens up the Launch Form where the Contracts Admin can change the Modify settings to "Yes", which opens the other options where they can select "Yes" on the Approvers they need to add, then manually select the user that needs to be added".

Hopefully this is helpful for you!

David_Wieseneck

@Zach_McKenzie thanks for sharing, but yikes that sounds so manual.

Zach_McKenzie

@David_Wieseneck , it does take a bit to set up. It's part of our workflow now, so even though it's manual, it helps give us what we need.