I have a custom entity named "Provider". When I create a new "Provider", I select an account from my list. I am also asked for a name. This is redundant for me, as I want the name to be the same as the account name.
My current approach to this is:
Is there a simpler way to do this? It seems that there must be.
You could turn it into a business rule. If NAME does not contain data and Account contains data. - Set Name to Account. Just make sure the scope is on more than just the form. If that doesnt make sense let me know and I can send some screen shots.
Thanks, Mike. I'm running into an issue on this approach. The account field does not come up as one of the fields for me to select.
Yep, I see what you are saying, its not an option in the SET options. How built out is the provider entity? If its new-er you could remove it and create another entity, then default the Primary field to something more valuable.
Otherwise, I think you did the right thing with a workflow.
@Adam Posegate - A question about your user experience. Are you creating these provider records from the existing account record, or are you creating them as net new records and then choosing the account manually? If you are doing them from the existing account record, you should be able to create a mapped relationship between the account record and the provider record where the new provider record can inherit values from the associated account record it was created from.
If you've found this thread useful, dive deeper into User Group community content by role