For VMware, their original request was to remove Internal and External Attendee fields from the Update and Meeting standard timeline types. They wanted to do this because they are lookups and they want to be able to include people that are not stored in SFDC. They chose to add a text field instead. This also helps with reporting because you can't report on those two standard fields.
After adding those, we realized you can't remove the standard internal and external attendee fields from the standard types. This feels like a reasonable enhancement.
My workaround was deactivating the standard types and creating custom Update and Meeting types and not adding those standard fields. However, it looks like the max of timeline types is 10. Is there a reason we put a limit on the amount of types?
VMware: Running into some challenges with timeline
None
Sign up
If you ever had a profile with us, there's no need to create another one.
Don't worry if your email address has since changed, or you can't remember your login, just let us know at community@gainsight.com and we'll help you get started from where you left.
Else, please continue with the registration below.
Welcome to the Gainsight Community
Enter your username or e-mail address. We'll send you an e-mail with instructions to reset your password.
While it is an extra step to add a contact to SFDC when you find out they are not populating as an external contact in the attendee field, it does help to enforce good contact database maintenance.
I generally agree with that point. I believe it's an access issue for the CSMs and they're not allowed to add contacts. For internal attendees, it seems more likely that some of those folks wouldn't be users in SFDC and be searchable in that field.
On the flipside of that, there isn't much you can do with either of those fields in rules and reports right now because they don't live on the same table as the timeline data (I believe). So right now, I don't think there is a huge issue with it, but something we'd want to work towards once future functionality comes out around these fields.
Yes, we should give the capability to remove fields in standard types (atleast the non-mandatory fields). I will communicate it to the engineering team and get it changed.
Reg. addition of >10 activity types - We usually start by giving a limit and then open it up if required by customers. The downside of not having a limit is that the customers start creating a lot of entries and then, in the end, it becomes unmanageable for them. Having a limit kind of forces them to think what they really need/ not need and be creative but if it is asked by a lot of customers we can increase the activity type limit to 15 or 20.
Thanks,
Nitisha