Thanks @Lucas1, I agree with the two feature requests and have voted. (Timestamp 1:25) may help sharing this vid with them in some cases in the mean time. https://youtu.be/vSsBjt9di5o
The work around here is to do an individual timelog for each item per person (as a sub item), with a different date for each timelog. You can automate the person assignment to creator, the date column to set date to today, and the status to done (so it doesn’t show up in My Work after you check the box to hide completed items there)
We are having the same experience. We have an Enterprise 200 seat WM, 50 seat CRM license and are constantly revisiting this discussion also.
1 Like
Same here! Workarounds to workarounds to workarounds in our designs.
3 Likes
I completely agree with the statements above. Our organization has been utilizing Monday.com for approximately 3–4 years. During this time, I have frequently lurked in these forums and have seen the release of numerous great new features, many of which have significantly enhanced the platform’s core functionality. However, it is disappointing that a seemingly fundamental feature, such as combining two date values into a timeline, requires reliance on a third-party application.
As an IT professional, I have worked extensively to extend the functionality of our Monday.com environment. By leveraging Make.com integrations, we have implemented over 100 scenarios aimed at addressing limitations in the platform’s native capabilities. These include relatively straightforward automations, such as updating an item’s name based on changes in a mirror column and vice-versa synchronizing the names of linked items when one is updated.
Despite these enhancements, the increasing dependence on third-party integrations introduces considerable challenges. These include heightened security vulnerabilities and operational risks associated with potential disruptions—such as API-breaking changes or outages on the part of third-party providers. While tools like Make.com can be invaluable for extending niche functionality, they should not be necessary for what should be considered core features of the platform.
This raises an important question: What defines core functionality versus niche functionality? I believe HDurey made a compelling argument in their post regarding the establishment of a development advisory group composed of advanced users. Such a group could provide critical insights from the client perspective, helping to prioritize which features are most needed as part of the platform’s foundational capabilities.
While the existing feature request and voting system offers a degree of user-driven development input, it can sometimes amplify the loudest voices rather than the most broadly impactful needs. A more structured approach to understanding and addressing these priorities could significantly enhance the platform’s ability to meet the expectations of its users.
3 Likes
I completely agree. A lot of the simple integrations that are publicly available seem so simple that they should be included as an automation out of the box. Right now we have had our internal development team put together some for ourselves just to save on long term monthly costs. Some of them are literally 15 lines of code. The most basic simple example of this is having the ability to assign the person that changed the status of a task automatically task when they change the status to something. How is that not a basic functionality. Like I said it was 15 lines of code OR a $4/month “upgrade”
3 Likes
Hi, @OmerK. Thank you very much for replying here! I appreciate your acknowledgement of this feedback.
Just want to reply to a few specific points you shared.
I want to believe you—but if that’s really the case, Monday’s support agents need to be given some constructive feedback about the language they use when interacting with customers about missing desired functionality. They regularly position a third-party app as the solution—without making any acknowledgment of the feature request at the core (or any empathizing agreement that it would be useful), without mentioning the product roadmap or whether that feature exists on it, without offering to submit anything helpful on their end, and often without even directing folks to the feature request forums.
I have plenty of other constructive feedback about the standards to which Monday support agents are held; I’m only bringing up this particular behavior because it’s directly relevant to this conversation. The way in which stuff is communicated to the customer matters more in forming that customer’s perception than the way things may actually work behind the scenes.
Of course! I’m aware that’s how product development/management works, and that every decision comes with tradeoffs that often aren’t obvious from the outside (though it was still worth spelling out for onlookers.)
With that in mind, I implore you to make your development roadmap more transparent. I understand the pitfalls of full transparency—the many circumstances that impact a feature’s release timeline change constantly, and I agree that it’s best to avoid setting hard customer expectations you’re not 100% sure can be met. But you could have a customer-facing version, tied to the internal one, that either doesn’t provide specific dates at all, or pads all expected release dates with large margins of error so you have the opportunity to surprise and delight by launching ‘early’.
An even better approach I’ve seen employed by other comparably-scaled SaaS companies is to engage the user community in some of the prioritization decisions. You could have a live ‘feature request leaderboard’ that lets users rank the features you’re considering, relative to one another. Yes, you have this forum where people can upvote requests, but that doesn’t address the tradeoffs we know come with focusing on one feature over another. Having users put them in order of priority would give you better, more granular data to drive your internal decisions, and it would make your customers feel more included and respected—plus, it would subtly help more customers understand the reality that prioritizing one thing often requires deprioritizing another.
Or you could take a page from Zapier’s playbook and create an ‘early access program’ with a Slack community (power users), where PMs and devs hang out alongside users—and often pop in with polls asking users to vote on which of two features under consideration they think are more important, or to describe how they’d expect a feature called {XYZ} to work. That’s a much lighter lift to set up and maintain than the leaderboard ranking I suggested above, but it’d still be a huge step in the right direction when it comes to making users feel like their needs matter when it comes to roadmap decisions. You could require users to apply to be a part of that community (and agree to its acceptable use terms), and accept some subset of those applicants—rather than letting users add themselves—if you’re worried about the scale becoming unmanageable.
Thank you!
I’d be happy to extrapolate on any of those feature desires I listed and their applicable use cases, or to talk through some other big ones (the ones I listed were just off the top of my head) here, or in a user interview, if that would help the case at all.
Thanks again for your time and attention. (And I’ll thank you even more if you end up actioning any of these suggestions!)
3 Likes
You left out the fact they now charge more for CRM while the CRM still doesn’t work like other CRMs
- annual goal widget has been broken for years
- the funnel view doesn’t look like a funnel and filters weirdly
Then you have the massively limited forms feature which can’t reference other boards even with a mirror column (also that is the most frustratingly way to execute synced data).
I love Monday. I was an early user when it was da pulse. The layout works for my brain. But I now have a startup and the costs are starting to get out of control for things that should be basic.
Tons of third party apps do not maintain soc2 compliance which we do- and our clients require which means I cannot use those apps to make Monday complete- nor should I have to.
4 Likes
I could not agree more. It has become really disappointing and I feel like Monday doesn’t fully grasp that many of us cannot purchase the third party applications.
3 Likes
Hey @arf, thank you so much for sharing your detailed feedback and thoughtful suggestions! We genuinely appreciate the time you took to share your perspective.
Your points about communication style, transparency, and fostering more community involvement in prioritization are incredibly valuable. We’ve noted everything you’ve shared and will make sure it’s passed along to the relevant teams for consideration.
Thank you again for engaging with us - we truly value your input!
1 Like
I want to second everything being said here by @arf AlexR-F.
1 Like
As a government entity using Monday for many internal and external facing applications we are extremely limited in our ability to use external apps and need the desired functions cooked into the native Monday application (like map markers that actually sit on the exact geographic location - an not the nearest street address - as there are none on a volcano).
1 Like
You left out the fact they now charge more for CRM while the CRM still doesn’t work like other CRMs
- annual goal widget has been broken for years
- the funnel view doesn’t look like a funnel and filters weirdly
Then you have the massively limited forms feature which can’t reference other boards even with a mirror column (also that is the most frustratingly way to execute synced data).
I love Monday. I was an early user when it was da pulse. The layout works for my brain. But I now have a startup and the costs are starting to get out of control for things that should be basic.
Tons of third party apps do not maintain soc2 compliance which we do- and our clients require which means I cannot use those apps to make Monday complete- nor should I have to.
1 Like