Got an idea for us?
What would you like to see in Mercury? Do you have an idea for new functionality, changes or tweaks to what you can already do - let us know!
Select Category
Summary
Details
3
Bulk move opportunities to a new status when updating the name of a status
under review
Currently if you change a Status Name in anyway, all of the opportunities sitting under that status do not update to the new status name are are left hanging outside of the status workflow and effectively lost in the system. The only way to add back into the workflow is to individually go into each opportunity that was sitting under the old status name and manually move it to the new status name. If you could bulk move, this would mean you could amend your workflow at any time (rather than set up once and be stuck with those status names). I would like to completely overhaul a number of our Opportunity workflows, however, I am unable to do so, as the thousands of opps sitting in old statuses would be lost in the system – and the only alternative is to manually open each opp, change the status to the new workflow status name, save, close. We regularly move “Prospect” opportunities that are over a certain number of days old and no return contact to our “Lost” status. Again, if we could choose these in bulk and move, it would save having to open each individually and move to the Lost status. We have hundreds of opportunities currently sitting in ‘Settled’ status that have been paid out/discharged and should be moved out. I would like to move these in bulk to the Discharged status, but again, because I cannot choose the opportunity by headline and bulk move, I will have to open each individually and move status. The other options is to link the status name blocks so that if you amend the label - the opps sitting under that label will move over with the new name. At least this would fix the problem of opps with no valid status and make it possible to amend workflow once set up - but not as handy as bulk moving. I can understand how a small broker would not see use for the above – however, for larger organisations it really is necessary. Hope this helps!
1
Load More