How to Use the Ideas Feature
What you need to know about Docusign Community IdeasThis guide will walk you through the process of sharing your ideas, voting on existing ideas, and...
23970
Want to shape the future of Docusign? Add your ideas for dream features and upvote others you love.
There are two options for time zones:Either the administrator sets the signer's time zone to be the same as the one defined in their account Or the administrator checks “Allow users to set their own time zone and date format,” in which case the software sets a default time zone that is not related to the country defined when the account was created. In this case, the signer must change the settings in their account. This is rarely the case because the signer user does not think to change their account settings.Therefore, I suggest the following improvement:either take into account the country defined when the account was created to set the appropriate time zone by defaultor, in addition to the country, ask for the time zone to be selected when the account is created.
The Template search options do not include the ability to include the Template Description as part of the logic. People put some very useful information in that field and to make it completely invisiode to any search logic seems like a big miss. Seems like a no brainer to add that field as part of the lookup info when searching by Template name.
While the electronic signing experience is strong, the current Wet-Sign (Print & Sign / Upload) recipient workflow introduces significant usability challenges that negatively impact completion rates, client experience, and operational efficiency.After internal review and engagement with DocuSign Support, we have confirmed these issues are product-level limitations, not configuration-related. We would like to propose enhancements to improve clarity, reduce user error, and better support regulated workflows that require ink signatures.Key Pain PointsMisleading UI cues: Wet-sign envelopes look and behave too similarly to e-sign envelopes. “Sign Here” tags still appear, suggesting digital signing is possible even when it is not. Hidden required actions: Critical steps (Download → Print & Sign → Upload) are not intuitive and are often missed. Inconsistent mental model: Clients regularly receive a mix of e-sign and wet-sign envelopes and struggle to distinguish the required action between them. Insufficient in-product guidance: Email instructions alone are not enough; users need contextual clarity at the moment they interact with the envelope. No enforcement guardrails: Users can attempt to “Finish” the envelope without completing the mandatory upload, leading to confusion and support intervention.Requested EnhancementsWe propose that DocuSign evaluate improvements such as:1. Clear visual differentiationProminent banner or label such as “Wet Signature Required – Print, Sign, and Upload” Suppression of digital signing affordances (e.g., “Sign Here” tabs) when the envelope requires a wet signature2. Unavoidable, in-context guidanceA step‑based flow outlining the exact process Instructional modal or persistent banner displayed upon opening the envelope3. Improved visibility of mandatory actionsClear prompts directing the user to download, print, and upload Reduction of reliance on hidden menu options4. Guardrails to prevent errorsControls that block or warn when a user tries to complete the envelope without uploading the signed document Removal of misleading “1 required field left” messages that imply electronic signing is necessaryDesired OutcomesLower abandonment and confusion for wet-sign envelopes Higher completion rates and fewer support tickets Better alignment with compliance requirements for regulated signatures Strengthened end‑to‑end experience for organizations frequently handling mixed e‑sign and wet‑sign workflowsThese improvements would greatly enhance the usability of DocuSign’s wet-sign capability and support organizations with regulated or jurisdictionally constrained signature workflows.
Hello! I am writing to suggest an enhancement for the Tasks interface.Currently, the "Tasks" tab provides a standard set of columns. While useful, users often need to see specific attributes (such as Expiration Date, even after expired).I’d like to make it possible for Admins or Users to customize the Task Tab columns by selecting specific Attributes.This would reduce the number of clicks needed to identify high-priority contracts, users could sort their pending tasks by custom fields and provide a "dashboard" feel to the task list, making it easier for teams to manage high volumes of documents. I would love to hear if others in the community feel this would be beneficial or if there are any plans for this in the roadmap! Thanks!!!
We are trying to subscribe to an italian procurement portal. We have so many different versions. With this one unfortunately the portal won't accept our signee's signature as Docusign adds their Seal after ours and the portal owner sees this as an addition signature of someone who is not a signee of our company. (no matter how we explain this). It would be handy perhaps to have the option to turn this off, remove the docusign seal when we run into this issue with certain portal. We would not want to remove this seal all together as I take it this is also a security level for anyone else to know the document was not tampered with after signature. Also we're not the admin of Docusign in this company. It would be a hassle to have to go to the admin per case explaining what needs to happen and why. So perhaps have a way to untick the box for the seal when signing or downloading or something. Thanks.Rebecca N.
Currently, when using Step Update Security, it is only possible to add security groups or users. However, there is no option to remove an existing user or explicitly set their permission to No Access.In our use case, we want to apply security to a specific folder and ensure that the CLM user does not have access. With the current functionality, the CLM user cannot be removed or restricted through Step Update Security, which limits our ability to properly control folder permissions.Requested enhancement: Allow removal of existing users/groups when using Step Update Security. Allow explicitly setting “No Access” for a specific user (e.g., CLM user group). Enable administrators to fully control folder-level security through the step configuration. Benefit:This enhancement would provide more flexible and complete security management, allowing administrators to ensure that unwanted users (such as CLM system users) can be removed or restricted when configuring folder permissions. Use CaseWhen the workflow creates a new supplier folder and the “Finance” subfolder, the security settings must be automated so that only the “Finance Security” group has access.To meet confidentiality requirements, access for default groups (for example, the “CLM User” group) must be removed so that these users cannot view the folder.Current Platform BehaviorBased on the current platform design, the Update Security step in a CLM workflow is additive only. This means it can grant permissions to additional users or groups, but it cannot remove existing permissions, remove inherited permissions, or set a group's access level to “No Access.”
ProblemIf Auto Renewal = Yes, the CLM system still requires manual or workflow-driven updates to: Extend the End Date Create the next renewal reminder Introduce native Auto Renewal logic in CLM:When: Auto Renewal = Yes The system should automatically: Extend the End Date based on the renewal term (e.g., +12 months). Create a new reminder based on the configured notice period. Repeat this process for each renewal cycle unless Auto Renewal is disabled.





Docusign Community
Code of ConductAlready have an account? Login
Enter your E-mail address. We'll send you an e-mail with instructions to reset your password.