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
17210
Want to shape the future of Docusign? Add your ideas for dream features and upvote others you love.
We would like to request the ability to add conditional logic to form fields in the Word Add In Template. This feature would dynamically show or hide fields based on a user's previous selection, creating a more intuitive and streamlined experience for form completion.For example, when a user selects "exempt" or "non-exempt" from a dropdown menu, additional fields would only appear for the selected option. Currently, all fields are visible, and we have to include "N/A" options, which increases the time and effort required to fill out the form.Implementing conditional logic would help us: Reduce clutter by only showing relevant fields. Improve data quality by eliminating the need for "N/A" entries. Streamline the user experience by making forms more dynamic and efficient.
We have 2 docusign accounts. One for real estate sales and the other for our property management company. We have the same notification preferences set for both accounts. The sales account ALWAYS send us an email when any signer first views their envelope. The property management account has NEVER sent us an email when a signer first views an envelope. After multiple back and forth troubleshooting sessions with support they cannot figure out why and suggested that we make an enhancement suggestion here. So that is what we are doing even though this is already a feature in DocuSign that works on one account and has never worked on our other account. Has anyone else experienced this type of issue?
Hello DocuSign team and community,We’re currently encountering a permissions challenge that’s affecting our workflows, and I’d like to suggest a potential improvement that could benefit many organisations.Our business uses DocuSign in multiple ways across departments. Most teams issue high volumes of letters and rely on the efficiency of having completed documents automatically emailed to recipients as attachments. This feature is a time-saver for them and improves their day-to-day productivity.However, within our HR department, we use DocuSign for issuing password-protected documents. For security reasons, we do not want these documents sent as email attachments once signed, as they are no longer protected at that stage.At present, the workaround we use is to manually toggle the relevant setting on and off depending on which department is sending documents. As you can imagine, this is not idea and places an unnecessary operational burden on our DocuSign super users.Feature request:Could DocuSign introduce the ability to customise this setting at the envelope or recipient group level? This would allow departments like HR to disable email attachments for sensitive use cases, while allowing the rest of the organisation to retain their efficiency-oriented preferences.I imagine many organisations must face this same conflict - balancing convenience with compliance and confidentiality.We would be keen to integrate DocuSign more deeply into our HR processes, but this current limitation is a barrier.Grateful for any thoughts or support from others who'd find this useful.Thank you!
On the Home page, in the Agreement activity section, it would be helpful to display the name of the person whose signature is pending, rather than “Waiting for 2 others”. When we send a document to a single person, that person's name is displayed, but as soon as we add two or more people (regardless of whether they are signatories or cc recipients), all we see is: “Waiting for 2 others”. In our company, we rarely send envelopes to just one person, and knowing exactly who the envelope is intended for would save us a lot of time! Thank you!
Love the Idea of the Mark-up Tool but needs a few advancements.Line option - make available for recipients also (put the option under the comments option.) Move the Mark-up option (while in recipients hands) from the [Other Actions] button to under Add Comments icon. Currently if recipient adds Mark-up to document, next signer cannot visually see what was covered. Within the document, wherever there was a Mark-up added: add an Icon to the left of that Mark-up and add a feature where the next signer can click on that icon and the mark-up will briefly disappear. This will allow all parties to view the original language. While other parties can edit other people’s mark-ups, you can delete all, change and revise, however, you can only change or revise within the size of the original mark-up’s box size. Allow this to be resized. Require all signers to initial mark-up. Any Changes to mark-up, needs to be rerouted to all who have not seen. (similar to the collaborative option of text fields) Allow any user to reject just the Mark-up...or allow it to be deleted from another signer Allow SENDER to change mark-up formatting if they want, particularly Font Color.
Hi,For QA purposes the signing order of recipients for my documents usually doesn’t matter. However, when docusign automatically reorders my recipients without my knowledge or consent, it confuses me because i am usually referencing an ordered list. when the names are put out of order, it is more difficult for me to verify that i added all the needed recipients. let me change the order to what i want it to, then toggle off set signing order, but preserve the order i set just for my own view.
An internal deviation occurred because the user's signature was truncated in the completed document in Samsung Biologics. *image removed* The CFR part11 also states that signatures should be in human-readable form in printed matter. In addition, as an GMP company, SBL's signature cut is against internal regulations.Below is SBL QA's opinion.-----------------------------------------Since the signature 'Person/Date/Time' information cannot be verified/tracked in the finalized document itself, it is considered GDP violation (Originality, Readability, Accuracy, etc.). Since the E-FORM is the original and does not exist as a separate True Copy to compare/prove the existing signature, it is considered appropriate to capture the loss of records in the original as a Deviation. For the truncated information, it seems that you can check it through Audit Trail, so impact seems to be small, but it seems appropriate to capture the event and impact verification results through Deviation.----------------------------------------If the Impact is small but captured as a deviation within the SBL, the system needs to be improved to prevent the issue from recurring. Guiding users through the process is not a complete prevention of issues. Therefore, I would like to ask if one of the three below is possible through system improvement.- Make the 'Sign field' the same as the signature size so that the user can recognize the signature size.- If the signature is truncated from the document, an error occurs and finish is not possible.- Resize the completed signature before finish (We understand that can re-sign after the signature has been canceled.)
We use the 21 CFR Part 11 module for pharmaceutical industry, specifically in this example to record the creation / amendment / extension and ultimately retirement of Standard Operating Procedures (SOP’s) within the business. Recently as part of an SOP amendment the document was sent out to 3 x parties for signature. The first one received and signed OK, but the second one commented that they had never received the envelope. When we went looking in the audit history it appeared as if the envelope had been moved into a folder called “Bin” for some reason. This is not a folder we’ve created or are familiar with, so we can only assume that someone manually moved it here. The idea / request is simple - the current audit trail for envelopes, particularly when using the 21 CFR Part 11 module for regulated pharmaceutical industry - is not detailed enough. We went into the audit thinking we could identify who moved the envelope here and when, but no this level of detail is not provided. The audit trail for an envelope should provide this level of detail - it would allow us to problem solve why a multi-party signing “stalled” and importantly with who so we can provide them with training. At present there is nowhere near enough detail to show precisely what happened to an envelope as it moves through the system - every single action should be record along with who performed it and when and this audit should be immutable. Many thanks Chris TottenSenior IT Architect, Norbrook Laboratories Limited, UK





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.
Sorry, we're still checking this file's contents to make sure it's safe to download. Please try again in a few minutes.
OKSorry, our virus scanner detected that this file isn't safe to download.
OK