Multiple owners for action items would be very beneficial.
Requested by Rene Jeddore
We've heard this one before, and there are a couple of ways to interpret it. The version we've discussed supporting would make it possible to enter multiple owners for an action item, with the expectation that each of these people needs to complete that action independently. That way, note takers can write the task down once and then have copies automatically created for each person who needs to do it.
An example of the use case we're intending to support would be something like this:
Task: Submit your nominations for employee of the month.
Owner: John, Tony, Shari, Sumai, Lisa (All team leads)
The expectation would be that each of those people needs to submit their nominations, and mark their copy of the action item complete.
The other possible interpretation of this request works like this:
Task: Decide where we'll have our next Board meeting.
Owner: Shari and Bill
In that example, the task only needs to be done once and either Shari or Bill could mark the action item complete.
We are not planning to support this later version, but I can suggest some alternate ways to get that result if that's what's desired here.
In which case the fact that you are planning on supporting this is great!
I would like to be able to add a number of team members to an action which is the same for all but needs to be completed independently by each person for their department. how can I do this without duplicating the action 6 times and adding a unique owner to each action
Right now, the only way to do this is to literally make 6 items. I think it's pretty clear that this would be a popular feature for us to tackle soon!
We met today to discuss development priorities and bumped this request up on the list. There are a few requests in the queue before this one (like rolling up motions so they're easier to review) but this is now officially planned. I would guess this means we'll get to it within the next 6 weeks, but it's too soon to have a firm date.
We'll update this topic when we begin work on this feature and give you a more confident timeline.
Hi Elise Thank you. This is very positive news. Its also good to see that a company is prepared to listen to its userbase and plan accordingly. Regards Ger
This feature is now available! See our announcement post: http://lucidmeetings.freshdesk.com/support/discussions/topics/16000023905
I can only create an action item for multiple people while in the meeting itself. If an action item is created outside of the meeting it can only be created for a single person at a time, and only yourself when creating it, though it can be edited afterward.
I would also like to be able to assign an action item to multiple people in such a way that the item isn't marked as complete until all parties check it off.
I guess I am trying to get multi-person to-do list functionality within Lucid as most of our to-do lists come from the meetings. Action items seem t be a great start, but it is still missing some of the core functionality that we require.
I can help with some brainstorming if needed.
I have another action item request.
I am creating a template for an action item meeting. I would like to be able to break down the meeting in this way:
2. Completed Items since the last meeting (or a time period, one month, two months, etc).
3. Overdue Items
4. Short-term action items (due within a month)
5. Long-term action items (due beyond one month).
I can do all except the "since last meeting" and the "beyond one month".
I also believe (I haven't tested this yet) that if I use the existing functionality and have agenda item "3. Overdue items" and item "4. All Action Items", (with no number 5) the overdue items will be shown in both lists.
Is this something that can be tweaked?
Here are some quick thoughts on your list:
1. Creating multi-owner action items outside of meetings: Yes, that makes sense and it something we can look into. It feels like a near-term win. We would want to do this at the room-level so we have access to the room roster for the assignee pick-list.
2. All assignees must complete the AI to mark the entire AI complete: We have discussed this quite a bit internally in the past, so we're quite familiar with the use-case involved. We elected not to do that on the first pass because it requires a data model change (from 1 to many) on the AI to assignee relationship. It also wasn't clear which use-case for multi-AI assignees would best fit the need. We'll see if there's a reasonable path forward.
3. Smarter SmartLists for AIs: I think your assessment about filtering options is correct, though I'll take a pass and verify that. We're seeing some other requests for SmartList filter enhancements as well, since people are starting to put process to work for them. It's probably more than a tweak, but less than the "all assignees must complete" option for AIs.
I'll poke around this week to see if there's a short term win on any of these. If there is, it's most likely to be on #1, but I'll have a better sense after digging in a bit.