If/Then Conditions Based on Task Settings (not just actions) for Rules

I love the rules feature. It has done so much for us to further our automation.

It would take a huge step forward if the settings on a task could be available features/options in rule creation.

For example, as rules stand today, it requires an activity to take place to qualify as a Trigger (i.e. a task is added to a section, or due date is set, or a custom field is changed). But we could dramatically enhance the outcome of rules if we could use if/then logic to say, for example:
The Trigger configuration is, If John is the assignee (already assigned — not the activity of changing the assignee to John) and (+) the task gets moved to X Section, then take Z action.
Result: This would mean lots of other things could be moved into X Section, but the rule would only apply if John was already the assignee and would not trigger for any other assignee.

Another example:
The Trigger configuration is, If the single-select custom field selection is X (already been selected — not the action of changing the selection), and (+) the Approval Status is changed to Rejected, then change the Assignee to John.
Result: This would mean anything that is classified as a “Design Review” (if that is the selection of the custom field referenced) that gets rejected (not approved), could then be immediately escalated to John. And if “Content Review” is the custom selection, a similar rule could say if rejected then change assignee to Jane.
Today the options for rules to be triggered only when an activity takes place, would limit the second example above to ALL rejected tasks being assigned to one person because we can’t differentiate the task using any of the task’s settings/setup.

Thank you for your consideration.


Unless I’m misreading, both of your examples actually already work in just the manner you’re requesting.

Have you tried these two examples? It just takes a couple minutes to do a test in a private project and see what happens; I think you’ll be surprised.

The trick is that the trigger titles are mistakenly worded to make one think that each part of a multi-part trigger must change but only a single one of the triggers much change (to activate the rule); the other trigger, like “John is the assignee” is all that’s needed for the other trigger.

Hope that helps,


1 Like

This topic was automatically closed after 4 days. New replies are no longer allowed.