Settings and activity
1 result found
-
235 votes
Hi everyone, we appreciate the feedback we've received on this change and while this was an intentional change this is something our product teams are monitoring feedback of very closely and considering improvements around in the new clients experience.
While we can't make any commitments atm I will be certain to share any plans with you all here.
An error occurred while saving the comment An error occurred while saving the comment 
Louise Mathers
commented
Another significant issue with the removal of a feature like this is the increased risk of user error. We first need to identify every client that shares the same address, often across multiple client groups. We then have to re-enter that address individually (sometimes 50 or more times) which is both inefficient and highly prone to mistakes.
We recently migrated from APS, and this capability was one of its many key strengths. APS not only offers broader functionality than Xero, but it also allows bulk address updates; something that is no longer possible in Xero.
Given the volume of long-standing feature requests for functionality that is standard in other practice management systems, it is difficult not to conclude that the administrative realities of accounting practices are being undervalued.
Louise Mathers
supported this idea
·
From reading the comments so far, this is clearly an extremely unpopular update. What’s also clear from Xero’s official response is that the change was intentional, not an oversight. That’s what makes it worth questioning why it was done.
As we all know, this forum is littered with feature requests that have sat unanswered for years and years despite being repeatedly raised by accountants, bookkeepers and admin staff. Against that backdrop, the deliberate removal of a widely used and genuinely useful feature makes very little sense on its own.
Until you look at the update more broadly.
This change didn’t just remove the ability to bulk update addresses. It arrived alongside a raft of administrative changes that add friction, clicks, and confusion to everyday tasks. Something as simple as adding a new client now involves more steps, more buttons, and more guesswork just to achieve the same outcome we had before. I won’t list them all; most of us are discovering them in real time as we try to stay efficient.
Which leads to a bigger question: was this feature removed as a distraction?
While we’re all (rightly) focused on the loss of one glaringly useful function, attention is being pulled away from the many long-standing issues that remain unresolved, as well as the quieter changes that are steadily increasing admin time across the platform.
So perhaps the strategy is this: remove something highly visible, weather the backlash, then reintroduce it later as a “concession” while the other inefficiencies remain firmly in place.
One can’t help but wonder.