Ask Search:
Chris KerseyChris Kersey 

create cases based on multi picklist selections

I have two pick-lists - a controlling picklist that determines what values populate the dependent multi-picklist. Based on what I've read, multi-picklists = bad... baby seals suffer because of them. But I have to ask before making a 100 checkboxes. 

Can anyone think of a way to create a case based on the selections in a multi-picklist?

e.g.  multi-selections
-- Create "save the baby seals" case
-- Create "defeat the multi-picklist monster" case
-- Create "go-fund my seal" case
... etc.

Much obliged.
C. 


 
Best Answer chosen by Chris Kersey
Susan ThayerSusan Thayer
LOL. Those poor baby seals.

You do not give us enough information to go on but there are many ways to architect your org to avoid  both100 checkboxes and multi-select picklists. The most common is related lists.

As to your question, I am assuming you want the user to select one or more items in a multi-picklist and that creates a case for each item selected. If the end goal is to create a case then you could add a guided action or flow to walk the user through a set of questions. Then you create a case for each option they select.

All Answers

Chris KerseyChris Kersey
P.S. I meant to say "Make a case for each item selected"!
Susan ThayerSusan Thayer
LOL. Those poor baby seals.

You do not give us enough information to go on but there are many ways to architect your org to avoid  both100 checkboxes and multi-select picklists. The most common is related lists.

As to your question, I am assuming you want the user to select one or more items in a multi-picklist and that creates a case for each item selected. If the end goal is to create a case then you could add a guided action or flow to walk the user through a set of questions. Then you create a case for each option they select.
This was selected as the best answer
Chris KerseyChris Kersey
You assumed correctly :) 

We have an outward facing form that regional sales managers must fill out in order to request services. The form is meant to overcome communication problems that arise when said sales managers don't give our tearm enough information to research and produce a solution for the client. A solution would consist of several services, each with it's own turn around time that is contingent on outside resources. That means a service request is built over time, can be delivered a little at a time or all together. Regardless, the end product can consist of upwards of 30 services. Each case represents a service that can be checked off when it is complete - we use related lists for these cases to get a full view of the services requested for the client - cases pending assignment to internal staff, cases currently being worked by staff, and cases delivered. 

This form contains a check list (among other things) of categorized services we offer, based on our understanding of the end-goal expressed by the client. We use cases to house the details required to fullfill each service "requested", and track it's progress. So the form itself has a related list of cases associated with it. It is this related list we are building out to track our progress in meeting its fullfillment. 

So the sales team gathers services on the form via fields and check boxes, and when the form is deemed to have the information we need in order to begin executing those services, the status is changed and cases are generated based on the selections, attached to the form to keep them packaged alongside the intended goal this particular form is meant to address. 

So there's the back story - sorry if that's TMI, but in the end, what we need is a SF way of generating cases that are "queued up" for our service team to pick up and address. The form is the quality-of-the-request check.

If related lists are a solution, I'd need more guidance on that front, but my hopes were that process builder might be used to "iterate" (I know it can't, hence this post!) selections and create a queued up case for our service team to tackle one at a time.

Let me know if that's TMI, or not enough!
Thank you so much.
C.