Overall Satisfaction with Workfront
Workfront is used by our entire marketing department including our Europe, Japan and China locations. We use the ProofHQ and Project Managment systems to manage all aspects of our processes.
- Project template management
- Proofing integrated with projects
- Ease of adoption
- Allows different teams to use waterfall, Kanban and Scrum at the same time
- The UX/UI needs more attention. There are many buttons programmed into the system that do not mean what they say or are confusing to the user.
- Workfront is often called "WorkAround" by users because that is what is often offered as a solution for UX/UI issues. For example the "Work On It" button is not reportable and does not actually change the status of the task to "In Progress" as users would expect.
- Form fields lack a way to label them to identify which group that field is for that is hidden from the end users. Workfronts suggested "WorkAround" is to label the fields with "HQ" or "EU" to identify the owner of the fields these codes actually show to the users i.e. "HQ Date Email Is Due". Once again poor UI/UX.
- It has brought transparency to the status of our projects (over 175 active at one time)
- Its centralized communication about projects enabling teams to review comments, documents and updates.
- It allows us to forecast resource loads during strategic planning
JIRA and Clarizen were too complicated and did not offer an integrated document review and proofing system.
Microsoft Project did not handle multiple small projects and resource allocation as well.
Smartsheet was too limited for large teams and required too much manual work.
Workfront had the proofing system that marketing departments depend on for customer review and approval.
Microsoft Project did not handle multiple small projects and resource allocation as well.
Smartsheet was too limited for large teams and required too much manual work.
Workfront had the proofing system that marketing departments depend on for customer review and approval.