Multiple Conditions for a reference field
Okay guys, this one is giving me a hard time. I have a many to many relationship built in (with use of a buffer table) Table 1 - Vendors Table 2 - Assignments Table 3 - Claims Vendor -E As...
Forum Discussion
MANNY, how you been? Sorry, its taken me 13 hours to answer this.
You will want to make sure your Vendors are connected to a "State", and that the Claim also has a "State" that match exactly. Then if the claim has the "Type" that you are using for the other conditional behavior you will combine those both into a formula text field.
Basically, you will have 2 formula text fields that have identical outputs.
[State]&"-"&[Type]
One field will be on the claim and one will be on the Vendor. Then make the conditional value be dependent on the formula field you just made.
Let me know if that make sense.
You will want to make sure your Vendors are connected to a "State", and that the Claim also has a "State" that match exactly. Then if the claim has the "Type" that you are using for the other conditional behavior you will combine those both into a formula text field.
Basically, you will have 2 formula text fields that have identical outputs.
[State]&"-"&[Type]
One field will be on the claim and one will be on the Vendor. Then make the conditional value be dependent on the formula field you just made.
Let me know if that make sense.
Matt! Good to hear from you man!
No worries on the delay.
This would work, but theres one minor issue.
So every vendor is tied to a state
And every claim is tied to a state
So that works,
The issue here being that the claim does not have a type association.
As an example; We would have to assign a defense counsel to a claim and an Independent Adjuster to a claim.
The problem is we would have a crazy long dropdown of vendors if we only sorted by state or only by type. The formula field would be perfect for state, because the state won't change for the claim. But we would need to sort by vendor type.
Let me know if this makes any sense, all help is appreciated, thanks Matt!!!
No worries on the delay.
This would work, but theres one minor issue.
So every vendor is tied to a state
And every claim is tied to a state
So that works,
The issue here being that the claim does not have a type association.
As an example; We would have to assign a defense counsel to a claim and an Independent Adjuster to a claim.
The problem is we would have a crazy long dropdown of vendors if we only sorted by state or only by type. The formula field would be perfect for state, because the state won't change for the claim. But we would need to sort by vendor type.
Let me know if this makes any sense, all help is appreciated, thanks Matt!!!