Forum Discussion
LauraMcFeely
Qrew Cadet
Thanks so much, Laura!
I like your idea to simplify, but I think your way would rely on cases always being entered chronologically in terms of when they happened, and therefore Record IDs always being in order from smallest (earliest date) to largest (latest date). Unfortunately, we can't rely on that -- we sometimes find out about cases months after they happened, which is why I built it on Date rather than Record ID#.
I'm not seeing how your summary field for the first case after receiving advice is different from mine, other than being based on Record ID#. For some reason, summarizing by the minimum [Date of Case] when [Date of Case] is after the date in the field [Date of Teaching Advice] is not working.
I did not know about the new Summary Combined Text Field! That's very interesting, and could be really helpful. I'll play around with it and see how I can use it.
Thanks again!
I like your idea to simplify, but I think your way would rely on cases always being entered chronologically in terms of when they happened, and therefore Record IDs always being in order from smallest (earliest date) to largest (latest date). Unfortunately, we can't rely on that -- we sometimes find out about cases months after they happened, which is why I built it on Date rather than Record ID#.
I'm not seeing how your summary field for the first case after receiving advice is different from mine, other than being based on Record ID#. For some reason, summarizing by the minimum [Date of Case] when [Date of Case] is after the date in the field [Date of Teaching Advice] is not working.
I did not know about the new Summary Combined Text Field! That's very interesting, and could be really helpful. I'll play around with it and see how I can use it.
Thanks again!
LauraThacker
5 years agoQrew Captain
I replicated your two date summary fields and got results on both ends; so a possible reason why step 5 is returning en empty result is if the Case is not actually connected to the Training Advice.
------------------------------
Laura Thacker (IDS)
laura@intelligentdbs.com
(626) 771 0454
------------------------------
------------------------------
Laura Thacker (IDS)
laura@intelligentdbs.com
(626) 771 0454
------------------------------
- LauraMcFeely5 years agoQrew CadetHi Laura,
Thanks so much for taking the time to test this out, and for helping me think this through. After a good night's sleep, I realized that you're right, of course: I need to connect the cases to the training advice, which is the crucial thing. After thinking about this, I think that the complication of connecting them is ultimately not worth the slight increase in convenience.
So I'm sorry for wasting your time, but I appreciate that you helped me figure out why it's not worth it!
Laura- LauraThacker5 years agoQrew CaptainI must assume that your Training Advice and Cases are both connected to a "higher" table somewhere. If they are both connected to the same "higher" table; then you could possibly do the following.
Summarize to the higher-table the Record ID# of "latest" Training Advice record when it is created
Use an automation to find all Cases which are not already assigned to a Training Advice, and assign them to the latest Training Advice record which has been summarized to the higher table and added as a Lookup field into the Cases table (Latest Training Advice RID). This would keep the cycle of connections going without having to manually associate a Case to the Training Advice.
Just food for thought. Don't give up on a good idea just because it "seems" like too much effort. Automations have really had a major impact on how applications can improve daily user life.
------------------------------
Laura Thacker (IDS)
laura@intelligentdbs.com
(626) 771 0454
------------------------------