Ability to filter Processes Awaiting Approval by Approver in order to facilitate sending a report to each approver. Ideally, an automatic report that would be sent to each approver after x number of days of not being approved but could be manually filtered and sent in the meantime

Most of the government or large commercial customers will not go for Promapp unless we have a data center in Singapore. Does Nintex have any plans of hosting Promapp in Singapore Data Center ?

It would be helpful to be able to add text beneath a linked process to add context or specific instructions within a wider process.

It would also be useful to be able to edit the name of the process to fit in to the wider process that it's linked within.

Allow me to hide the Contact Support under the Help menu. I don't want the general user contacting Nintex Support. Many times they are asking a question about a process that Nintex can't answer or they are reporting an issue that should be vetted through the Promasters or our internal help desk first.

Wouldn't it make sense for the 'Triggers and Inputs' section to be at the top rather than at the end of the procedure. They are supposed to support the user experience by providing information on what triggers the process yet most users would not know to scroll to the end of procedure to see them. A trigger starts the process, so it makes sense for it to be at the beginning.

Ability to visually allow the reader to know that there is further detail under an activity like a task or note. Either by color of activity or some marker. Users do not inherently know to review the dialog box or procedure and may miss key information.

Often times we need to together the processes by a specific department. This will include several roles (ie Purchasing - Contract Admin, Purchasing - Buyer, etc). At a minimum, I would like to see a report that can search on role keyword to be exported to Excel with minimode links. I would really like to be able to print this package of processes to be able to provide to an executive leader, as they generally prefer to get the pdf version in a packaged manner.

Posting on behalf of Anthony at Nhshire

They would like approval process for first publish and then the option for subsequent publishes to just go through.

This is so authors follow the correct guidelines. Once those are guidelines, are met they do not require approval subsequent publishes.

At present, only promasters can import processes from other organisations who are sharing them with us. This is a waste of time, especially as we are encouraging process experts and process owners to drive their promapping and make contact with other organisations for promapping help.

To make it more obvious whether our users are viewing a procedure or policy page (and we have a third variation too) we would like to have a difference in formatting - such as the header being in a different coloured bar.

In addition to the favourite button, it would be great to have the share process link button show up when searching. I often need to provide links to a number of processes and having to go into each one to get the link is a bit frustrating and slow, this would definitely make it more efficient!

It would be good to have a 4th privilege option added to make the limiting of process creation easier to manage. Currently to have a view only user type you need to switch on the "limit process creation to PM, BA and PC" option in config which then means that you need to add users to the PC role in each process group manually.

It would be much easier to have a privilege available where view only access can be set at the user level rather than managing process creation user by user in each process group.

It would be nice to have a Publish All button to publish all of the process maps in a group at the same time.

Make it possible to extract a report for each role where its RACI is evidenced.
This report would allow us to see for which processes a certain role is responsible, is consulted, is a stakeholder, etc.

Our business has process writers that write on behalf of SMEs and Owners. They do not receive notifications when there is feedback provided nor when processes are ready for review. If there was a Process Writer field they would be able to receive notifications and see all feedback sent through for them to action or acknowledge

As we increase in process maturity more users would like to use active/wait timeframes and lean tags. At the moment only one tag can be shown on the map at a time. It would be great if you could select more than one (e.g. active AND wait times, active time AND lean, lean AND system) rather than toggling between options.

This is particularly important for the staff undertaking Lean Six Sigma training and improving processes.

There needs to be a way to add permissions to sub-groups so that we can set up consultants with access when they need to work with a specific team without giving them access to all of the processes.

I understand this would be a structural change but the current workaround of making the process group a top-level group isn't really viable longer term.

"Subgroups inherit permissions assigned to top-level groups. Inherited permission can be removed. You cannot add permissions for subgroups."

When a process has both "Map and Procedure" enable, the toolbar which has the (Summary, Feedback, Change Log, Documents,Targets, Systems, Tag and @Todo) tabs are only visible on the Map view. However when the process only has "Procedure" view enabled, the tool bar is visible in the Procedure view.

Can we make it so that the toolbar is visible in both Map and Procedure view when the process as Display type = Map and Procedure?