@Michelle Janine-Oracle yes, that was my backup plan, I just dislike the hard coding of it.

According to that SuiteAnswers, adding the year still is not an option.

Thank you!

@Judith Culanding-Oracle thank you, but I do not have a searchid in the URL when navigating the route you mention. My URL is https://<ACCT#>.app.netsuite.com/app/accounting/transactions/transactionlist.nl?Transaction_TYPE=CustDep&whence=

It seems it must be a bug with the record locking. As you can see in my original screenshot it was only locking on approved, but once I updated it to not lock the records, it was working as expected. I'll put a bug request in with them. Thanks!

Hi Red, Thanks for the details - it was none of the above. I talked to a counterpart from another subsidiary who supposedly was able to get it work from within our shared sandbox, so I am wondering if there is anything in the rules that can impact how the transactions are updated via email response?

Hi Ayitah, Unfortunatley that isn't a possible solution because if the rule isn't configured for that subsidiary, the transaction will go straight to rejected. Ultimately I need it to not pick the transaction up at all via suiteapprovals and rely on the existing workflow implemented.

Hi Surendra, That won't work either because I still need them to see those details on their customers and this group won't be able to handle switching roles just to see limited details on another customer. Thanks Tigran for the assistance, I will open a support case.

Hi Tigran, Sorry, yes the action was set field value. I switched the conditions to user interface, but I cannot match your conditions as I need it run off the sales rep field versus the role. The whole impacted team is on the Sales Person role so I would need it controlled by sales rep = user. Switching to user interface…

Overall workflow 2 actions in workflow

I tried that and it is unable to set the custom form field to dictate which version they should be seeing.

Thank you!

I was able to resolve my own issue.

Hi Lyka, "You need to connect the customer record to the vendor record so that you can source the Sales Rep." ← Is that not exactly what the other relationships is supposed to be doing natively?

Once I removed the required field from the workflow it worked fine. I turned the required field for the sales rep on the form itself versus the workflow and that seems to have resolved the issue. Doesn't seem to make any logical sense, but I guess the step away and come back to it method did the trick.

Thanks for the input! All customer records do have a sales rep on them, so it definitely isn't empty. We had it set as a required field in a workflow (not in the form directly) and upon turning it off, it allowed me to submit it but that still isn't the most ideal solution. I don't want to risk having records that do not…

No error itself, the field just isn't populating. The only error I truly get is from the SENDEMAIL action in the workflow, which is totally expected since the email is blank.

Hi Wee Ming, It is updating an existing record versus making a net new one. We are using the OOTB Sales Rep field which is just the list of employees. I just switched to "Santa Claus" in the example instead of leaving an actual employee name just for privacy purposes. It is pulling the actual employee name through the link…

Hi @Angelica Mae Segador-Oracle, Sure. Here it is. I'm trying to make the alert on the payment of a vendor, thus the only difference that you see from the instructions above.

I tried creating the custom "sales rep" field and applied to both the vendor and it isn't giving me the option to join with any of the customer fields. I am assuming it cannot make the bridge/connection due to the other relationship connection. I also tried applying it to a bill payment itself and it is still unable to…

I found the solution. I removed the transactions tile from the personalization within the vendor dashboard and added list - transaction. That seems to have cleared whatever settings she had applied to the transaction tile.