Settings and activity
3 results found
-
32 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment
Darriel Mendoza
shared this idea
·
-
197 votes
Hi team, as we continue shaping our product plans, we wanted to come back with an update here. While this is something we may revisit in the future, we want to be transparent that there are no plans to develop additional custom relationship types this year.
We’ll continue to keep an eye on the level of support for this idea, but we also wanted to be upfront with you now. If anything changes, we’ll be sure to share a further update.
Darriel Mendoza
supported this idea
·
-
21 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment
Darriel Mendoza
commented
Need to reflect in the relationships section what the actual relationships are across a group of entities. Using Shareholders or Beneficiaries as alternative options is not correct because this doesn't tell the actual and legal nature of the entities involved e.g. shares and units are not the same.
Darriel Mendoza
supported this idea
·
Clarification:
I was referring to the Jobs tab within the client page as snipped below: