Skip to main content

When creating conditions to automatically organize users into groups for our enrollment needs, I’ve found a limitation in the operators available. After scouring the community, I’ve come across some articles (Conditional Rules (for things like "User Additional Fields" in Automatic Groups) should have the same options as filtering in the User interface: "does not contain," "begins with," "ends with," and more.) where Docebo has officially parked the idea.  I can leverage the filters in the Users menu, but that process is intensive and manual. 

 

Details:

User Additional Field is a Free Text Field with comma-separated values. I.e., 001,004,009,051

Eligibility and Conditions

User additional field Job Functions contains 005

User additional field Job Functions contains 050

User additional field Job Functions contains 051

 

Problem:

Due to the comma-separated values, other codes that we want to exclude may be present along with the codes that we do want to include. 

 

Easy solution: 

Add a ‘does not contain’ condition

 

The Ask: 

The necessary conditions to create our groups are not available, so I am interested in learning any workarounds the community has to offer. Is there a better Field Category to select?

 

Hello,

 We have also had a similar issue. We have similar job titles that pull in people from two different departments. So when you pull in based on Job title it pulls in the people that should not be in there. (example the word Manager can be used for account manager, people managers, system managers, so if trying to single out one of those groups it can be difficult) 

Our work around has been trying to layer the conditions: Example:

Department Contains: (Insert conditions)

Job Title Contains : (Insert conditions)

Manager Contains: (Insert conditions)

 

The key is to find unifying pattern for the people you want in there, and make it so specific only they will be in the group. I have only had 1 time where I was not able to do this. I hope this helps!

Hello,

 We have also had a similar issue. We have similar job titles that pull in people from two different departments. So when you pull in based on Job title it pulls in the people that should not be in there. (example the word Manager can be used for account manager, people managers, system managers, so if trying to single out one of those groups it can be difficult) 

Our work around has been trying to layer the conditions: Example:

Department Contains: (Insert conditions)

Job Title Contains : (Insert conditions)

Manager Contains: (Insert conditions)

 

The key is to find unifying pattern for the people you want in there, and make it so specific only they will be in the group. I have only had 1 time where I was not able to do this. I hope this helps!

Thank you for the response. I think this would work if our user additional field only contained one value, but unfortunately, it contains many separated by a comma. ie. 006,007,010,051, so we can’t use ‘is equal to’. 

Boosting this as it relates to an upcoming release that misses the mark on improving automatic group functionality.

Reply


Terms & ConditionsCookie settings