RELATED IDEAS
This idea has been merged into another idea. To comment or vote on this idea, please visit APP-I-624 Ability to map idea statuses to feature statuses.
Map Initiative & Feature Statuses to Idea Statuses
Merged
A big part of a PM's job is close the feedback loop to customers, however, automation of that loop saves valued resources and critical dollars for our company.
In JIRA, we had this ability between Request & Work projects which streamlined PM daily tasks & provided real-time updates to customers. Without it in Aha!, Idea tickets are outdated & customers are continually reaching out for updates - losing us time that should be spent on other projects.
Additionally, according to the Aha! KB: "Promoting an idea to a feature or initiative causes the status of that idea to change to the first status that's in the category "In progress" We have multiple statuses in an 'In Progress' state. To move to the first one most likely is irrelevant so again, I'm seeing inaccurate data & wasted resources to update.
Appreciate the insight of how you view the difference between Future Consideration (i.e. backlog) and Planning to Implement (i.e. roadmap). This clarification does help@
See attached for what I’d like to see as a mapping with the understanding that the workflow for all products isn’t necessarily linear.
[cid:image002.png@01D492D1.443C4E10]
[https://www.mediamath.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/mm-signature.png]
Robyn Marie Diamond | Director – Product Operations
4 World Trade Center, 46th Floor, New York, NY 10007
rdiamond@mediamath.com | p 646.668.3297
I see, thank you for the additional detail Robyn. Can you explain what you mean by timed consideration levels in your backlog? Also, what types of feature statuses would those map to?
To give a bit more insight into our idea statuses, we define Future consideration as a good idea that we will consider for the future. These are not currently planned on our roadmap and we will continue to monitor customer feedback to determine if we will prioritize it.
The Planning to implement status can be thought of as a public view into the ideas that are on our roadmap.
I hope that helps from a transparency perspective. Thanks!
Hi Austin- I add this comment to the merged ticket. I will say, there isn’t a lot of transparency on your tickets that have been open for years but are just set to future consideration.
Either way, for us this is simple as all of our products have the same workflow (we strive for standardization & simplicity). In our Idea workflow we have timed consideration levels in our backlog & then different levels of in progress. To just arbitrarily say it’s the “first” one isn’t true. I’d rather it not map anything at that point because it’s potentially reflecting in correct data.
Hope this clarifies!
Hi there. To keep things consolidated, I need to merge this idea with the one you noted in the description. Would you mind adding your note as a comment on that idea? Also, I would to understand a bit more detail on your use case here. We have explored implementing this in detail and the complexity is in the mapping of statuses between the records. For example, since an idea could be promoted to a feature in a different product (or a feature moved to a different product) that uses a different workflow, you would need to potentially map many workflows to make this work.
Currently, the automatic updates happen when you move the feature to an "In progress" or "Shipped" status category. Are there other general steps your workflow that would suffice short of mapping every status? Thanks!