Community
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Do you mean 
Comments
by Nickel Super Contributor ritakog
on ‎06-03-2009 03:41 AM

Great ideas, Jeff...and comments below.  Would like to make sure that the associating of contacts (in addition to linking) does not go away!

  • Company level information gets entered on the "Contact level" view only.  In practice, this would not necessarily take up additional screen space. Perhaps an additional pane would be required, and we already have the SDK Middle Pane app which potentially could be adapted for this purpose. 
    ++How would you handle company record address information when the linked contacts are at different company locations? 
  • The Companies Detail View would be retained in all it's functionality except that it now becomes read only. All the information at company level is pulled from the contact level records. 
    ++Same issue as above
  • I would then also be inclined to have Opportunities linked directly to the Company name rather than a contact record ( when creating a new Opp you just select which of the contacts are to be associated with it.
    ++Yes, that's a great idea.
  • You can mail-merge any field on the screen, including Company level information.
    +++But some contacts may be at different addresses...see above.
  • Company view would automatically show combined Notes, Histories, Activities, and Opportunities
    ++And Documents and Secondary contacts, please.

 

by Silver Elite Contributor
on ‎06-03-2009 04:01 AM
  • Company level information gets entered on the "Contact level" view only.  In practice, this would not necessarily take up additional screen space. Perhaps an additional pane would be required, and we already have the SDK Middle Pane app which potentially could be adapted for this purpose. 
    ++How would you handle company record address information when the linked contacts are at different company locations? 

    ++++  In some ways we have that issue now when you update the links. You would have to be able to record the "Head Office" address in the "Company" part of the record and a local address in the "Contact" part of the record. You would also need a drop-down or two to be able to define hierarchies of Companies and Divisions.
  • The Companies Detail View would be retained in all it's functionality except that it now becomes read only. All the information at company level is pulled from the contact level records. 
    ++Same issue as above

    ++++ The Head Office address comes from the "Company" Part of the record. Individual contact addresses could be seen in the Contact list.
  • I would then also be inclined to have Opportunities linked directly to the Company name rather than a contact record ( when creating a new Opp you just select which of the contacts are to be associated with it.
    ++Yes, that's a great idea.
  • You can mail-merge any field on the screen, including Company level information.
    +++But some contacts may be at different addresses...see above.

    ++++ Retaining the Contact level address fields gives you the choice of mailing addresses.
  • Company view would automatically show combined Notes, Histories, Activities, and Opportunities
    ++And Documents and Secondary contacts, please.

    ++++ Agreed !!!

 

++++ Jeff

by
on ‎06-15-2009 04:38 PM
Good ideas here - Thanks!
by
‎03-03-2010 11:56 AM - edited ‎03-03-2010 12:21 PM

I see this was initialised some time ago now, however would like to add:

 

The biggest issue I have is that the Branch layer is missing from Companies. I am using Divisions to cover both divisions and branches. Most of the big corps I deal with look like this: Parent Coy/Divisions(Subsidiaries)/Branches. I have contacts in both branches and company head offices (= divisions).  In many cases the parent companies are not active in the day to day running of the subsidiaries but I need to show the whole group structure to be able to identify sister companies in a (Corporate)Group.

 

1. It would be great to be able list each layer in alpha order on request e.g. All Companies or All Divisions or All Branches as in the Company Detail window. The problem is that many Parent Company names bear little resemblance to the Division (Subsidiary) names, so can be difficult to find a Company (i.e. Division) in the current All Companies tree structure.

 

2. Why doesn't the New Secondary Contact automatically pick up the Company name from the Primary contact, at least in a drop down?

 

3. Totally agree that Opportunities only attach to Companies, with option to link to (multiple) Contacts.

Message Edited by GrahamS on 03-03-2010 12:21 PM
by edejeu
on ‎11-29-2011 04:28 AM

Quote: "The problems / limitations are:

  • Users are confused whether they need to fill in the company level information or not."

++ I do agree about this confusion. In our company many users tend to edit the content of fields that are actually linked to the above company layer (still) in the contact layer. And since we use ACT! for at least 10 years but only introduced the company layer 1 1/2 year ago, I do understand their confusion. I would already appreciate a warning whenever a company-contact-linked field of a company-contact-linked record is edited in the contact layer (instead of the company layer). Or even better, make these linked fields 'read-only' in the contact layer for all contacts that have a link to a company record. Otherwise their changes will be lost whenever anyone edits the company record later on. (To prevent this data loss, I have to run some sql comparison queries periodically, and edit the data in the right layer, which is time consuming).

Labels