Anyone else notice multiple phone and email types showing on records?

JoAnn Strommen · April 2

We have business rule in place to not allow a record to be saved with duplicate phone types. This a.m. I'm just getting going and have run into two records: one displaying 2 cell numbers, neither marked as inactive, another displaying 2 emails of the same type. Date last changed is not recent.

Any thoughts? Any one else finding this?

Lena Payne · April 3

@JoAnn Strommen could they have been added before the rule was set up? We had a similar issue and I exported all, sorted them and updated the ones that were duplicates (eg when we had 2 emails under the same email type, we changed one to email 1 rather than just email)

JoAnn Strommen · April 3

@Lena Payne Good thought, but no. Rule was in place before I was here and several are recent changes/adds.

Deb Dressely · April 3

@JoAnn Strommen I set our business rule to only allow one per phone type. I was not able to add the same phone in database view but NXT did not respect the business rule. It allowed me to add and save a second home number.

JoAnn Strommen · April 3

@Deb Dressely Thank you, Deb. I will check with others who can add these data points and see if they have done in web view. Agh!

Tracy Dodge · April 3

@JoAnn Strommen
This is happening to us too. We just noticed this week. Duplicate emails created by a recent donation. Our business rules do not allow for the same contact type to be used more than once. But it's happening. We are looking into it now.

Dariel Dixon · April 3

@JoAnn Strommen I'm pretty sure that NXT doesn't respect or follow DBV business rules. It is a bit of a problem for sure.

Elizabeth Johnson · April 4

@JoAnn Strommen I couldn't find an idea for this with a quick search. If someone finds one or creates one I'd vote for that web view to respect this dbv business rule.

Alex Wong · April 4

Is that a bad thing though?

even in db view, I have always wonder why Blackbaud has email handled in this manner. I get the different “type” of email: Home, Email, Mobile, Business. But I never get why we have to create Home 1, Home 2, Home 3, Mobile 1, Mobile 2, Business 1, Business 2, Email 1, Email 2

has anyone try RE NXT Email campaigning with this in mind? Meaning, since RE NXT Email campaign allow you to select an email type to send email, if someone has 3 email addresses of the same type, will all 3 email addresses get the email? That may be a good thing for org that wants to email all emailable email addresses of a constituent.

JoAnn Strommen · April 4

Very concerning that this is happening.

Not a web view issue for us, however. I can tell that the duplicate emails on the record were added using db view as comment field contains our notes. That field is not available in web view. I asked the other person who entered and she, like me, entered it in db view.

@Elizabeth Johnson I found one idea RENXT-I-1261 related to business rules.
Business Rules apply to NXT activity

@Alex Wong yes it's a bad thing to us. When we are pulling one email for something, we want to pull the one that we have identified as the primary type or primary email. We don't want to send multiple copies of same message.
We have Email/Email2/Email3 because over many years alums have used a variety of emails to communicate/make gifts/attend an event/rep at career fair. When different ones come in we have no current way to know if that is to replace other emails, be a new primary etc.

Concern also as web view will use ‘oldest’ email on record when no primary marked.

Deb Dressely · April 4

@JoAnn Strommen Another thought/question. Do you use another product with an import process that perhaps bypasses rules via import? We use Engaging Networks and import with a JMG connector. That will sometimes bring in data that bypasses our rules. We would import into database view and could contain notes not accessible from NXT.

Alex Wong · April 4

@JoAnn Strommen
for sending email in RE NXT, you can only select primary email OR select a email type, so there is no way to mark a type as primary type. Email Management is never easy not only b/c of data management, but b/c of donor preference and constant new email being added.

if you are going to send ONE email, use Primary is good, when no primary is found, using the “oldest active emailable” email is not a bad idea, but if there is specific knowledge on which is the primary email, mark in RE NXT.

Elizabeth Johnson · April 4

Thanks, @JoAnn Strommen, for the idea number! I voted, and here is the direct link if someone else wants to also vote

And yes feels like web view should at least default to the newest. We don't use that feature.

JoAnn Strommen · April 4

@Deb Dressely That could be the case maybe for some. It's not for what I found the other morning as our imported ones would not have the comment field data. Definite possible for other cases.

Jill Freidmutter · April 5

@Alex Wong, it is a problem when creating Constitent queries. Multiple instances of Email types create second lines in a constituent query that includes that phone type. And if exporting, would need to export multiple cases of each phone type. This becomes time consuming and creates a cluttered output. Not ideal if prefer one of each phone type.

Alex Wong · April 14

@Jill Freidmutter
yes, it can be a problem if your business process deems it to be.

For my org, we email all emailable email addresses, so when we used to export eblast list, we want each email addres in their own rows for import to eblast tool for sending. We do not want single row for each constituent record and have email addresses in separate columns.

Jacyn Stewart · May 29

@JoAnn Strommen This happens to us and as far as I can tell it's when there's a system created record (through Omatic import, or from a donation form, or event sign up) it doesn't respect the rules and creates duplicate types.

Anyone else notice multiple phone and email types showing on records?

Comments

Categories