Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

"whoami" function for users to find out dyn. group membership in item context

"whoami" function for users to find out dyn. group membership in item context

It would be nice to have function for users that can show them their dynamic group membership based on a selection in item's context.


In a complex setup with several "process roles" based on dynamic groups its its often hard to find out e.g. why some state transitions are not possible.


Hello Matthias,

                        I was reviewing this Product Idea, can you please elaborate "on a selection in item's context"? Can you please help me with a use case or workflow that you are going thru where you would need this & how does this information help you in your daily routine?


Kartik Oak





Reviewed by PTC Community Member

Main Category:

Integrity Lifecycle Manager Administration

Sub Category:

Users and Group Management

Related Working Group:

Integrity Lifecycle Manager Administration

Standard Functionality validated:


Standard Functionality available in Release 11.2:


Workaround exists:


Workaround Description:

A custom report has been created that will list the dynamic groups where the user is assigned to.

Workaround match:


Other knows solutions:

Pull out all group details using CLI or API, and analyse programmatically the dynamic groups. But this approach is quite complex, and you would always read data which you don't need to answer this question.

Related other Ideas:


Related Questions:


Related Tips:

Administration Configuration Reports

Next review Milestone:




Workaround Details

Please see this post from the same author.  


For IM it is almost impossible to understand the dynamic groups concept for the end-user.


In our solution many state transitions are multi-dynamic groups. Also users are assigned to many groups and mapped to multiple dynamic groups.

Hence the end user often does not understand why he is allowed / expected to work on one or the other item because of this multi-assignment.

A user expects a clear indicator out of what role / group he is now allowed to work on this element as this context would help him to understand the expected process step.


Also the item type workflow information is inconsistent as constraints are not evaluated within the workflow view.

This adds another level of complexity for the end user. A normal user has no chance to understand why a solid line (which is an allowed state transistion) in the workflow view is sometimes true and sometimes wrong because of a not visible field constraint the editing user is not satisfying.



Community Manager
Status changed to: Archived


We are archiving your idea as part of a general review. This action is based on the age of your idea and the total number of votes received, as per this announcement.

You can always post a new idea with all the details required in the form.

Thank you for your participation.