Feature Requests

Current Limitation: Currently, a workflow can only reliably perform one primary action (e.g. assignment or alerting). Configuring multiple actions such as assigning a request and triggering multiple reminders often requires creating separate workflows, which fragments what is logically a single process. Additionally, workflows do not support multiple reminder intervals (e.g. 60 minutes, 120 minutes) for the same status. Proposed Enhancement: Enhance workflows to support multiple actions within a single workflow, including: Assigning a request to specific users or account tags Triggering multiple reminders or alerts at configurable time intervals (e.g. after 60 minutes, 120 minutes) Use Case: When a request enters a Pending status: Automatically assign the request to a specific user or team If no action is taken, send a reminder after 60 minutes If still pending, send another reminder after 120 minutes Why This Is Helpful: This allows teams to model real operational workflows more accurately, reduces the need for redundant workflows, improves accountability, and ensures timely follow-ups without manual intervention, resulting in faster response times and clearer ownership. [UOL x United Square]

I would like to request the addition of a “Multiple Dates” field in the system. This will allow users to input more than one date per request, making it easier to track entries that span multiple days

Can we adjust the "Site" field so that instead of being blank by default, it automatically sets as “Outside Premise” or “Outside Shipyard”? This will help streamline entries and avoid leaving the field empty.

[Note: This is not about the Service Request Sign off flow, it's the universal custom processing statues] Allow notifications or alerts to be configured per custom processing status, so that when a request is updated to a specific status, the relevant assigned account(s) are automatically notified. This is useful when a request can move between these custom processing statuses. Relying on notes is harder to track Use Case Example: Contractor updates a work order to “Processing (Job Done)” → Manager is notified to review Manager reviews and updates status to “Processing (Revision)” → Contractor is notified to revise Contractor completes revisions and updates status back to “Processing (Job Done)” → Manager is notified again Manager verifies and updates status to “Complete” [Guthrie x PA]

Allow users (managers and contractors) to upload and store a company stamp, which can be included together with a digital signature when signing requests. This could be controlled via permissions to ensure only authorized users can apply the stamp. This is useful to better support organizations that require stamped and signed documentation for operational or contractual workflows. [CSK Landscape] [Princeton DG]

Currently, due dates for requests are typically set by managers or administrators. Responders (e.g. contractors) are unable to define their own timelines for assigned work orders. Proposed Enhancement: Allow responders or contractors to set or update the due date for requests created assigned to or created by them (e.g. as a “Projected Delivery Date”). These due dates should support reminders and notifications, similar to existing due date alerts. Why This Is Helpful: This holds contractors accountable for their own planning and timelines, improves visibility into expected delivery dates, enables more accurate scheduling and follow-ups, and ensures reminders are aligned with contractor-committed deadlines rather than assumed timelines. [CSK Landscape]

To allow visitor to register (both invited and walk-in) upon arrival using QR code. Currently registration upon arrival can only be done via tablet [Cyient]

Currently images uploaded in processing and custom processing stage are not editable/removable. The images/videos at these stages are locked in. [PA x Guthrie]

Currently, the asset import functionality allows users to upload asset details such as name, type, location, and other metadata. However, there is no option to include scheduled dates (e.g., preventive maintenance schedules, inspection dates) during the import process. This requires manual entry after import, which is time-consuming and prone to errors. Proposed Enhancement: Add support for importing scheduled dates as part of the asset import process. This can be achieved by: Extending the import template (CSV/Excel) to include columns for: Next Scheduled Date Frequency/Interval Last Service Date (optional) Validating date formats during upload. Automatically creating corresponding schedule entries in the system upon successful import. Benefits: Saves time by reducing manual data entry. Ensures accuracy and consistency in scheduling. Improves onboarding of large asset datasets for new implementations. Priority: High – This feature will significantly streamline asset management workflows.

Add an option within the Reports module to email reports directly to selected recipients. This could support choosing recipients from existing account users and optionally include external email addresses. [Cyient]