Add Existing button on custom object RRS feed

  • Question

  • Hi

    We have a custom entity (Thing1) that we've associated with Accounts and we have set the permissions such that the users are not allowed to create these new objects but they are able to associate any existing Thing1s with the relevant accounts - similar to the relationship between contacts and accounts. The problem is that the 'Add Existing ...' button does not show up on the Thing1 entity sub screen. If I enable the 'Create' permission for these users then this button does then appear but along with the 'Add New' button which is not what we want.

    Is it possible to keep the permissions as such to prevent the users from creating new Thing1s but to allow them to use the 'Add Existing...' functionality?

    Monday, June 15, 2009 12:12 PM


All replies

  • if you make change in security role by removing the create privilage both new and add existing are invisible
    Monday, June 15, 2009 12:23 PM
  • Uh, yes - that's what I've already found out. My question is is it possible to just have the 'Add Existing..' functionality available without the 'Add New..'? I would have thought that this is two separate permissions and this kind of granularity might be possible.

    Monday, June 15, 2009 12:26 PM
  • Hi,
    May be you could try by creating your thing1 (custom entity) as an organization owned entity instead of user owned !

    Nishant Rana
    Monday, June 15, 2009 12:59 PM
  • Why dont you just remove the "add new button" via javascript on the custom records using the forms OnLoad.

    This could help you find the button and hide it to users.


    Good Luck and tell us how you got on!

    Jonathan Nachman

    Jonathan Nachman KMS Software - CRM systems for the construction and building industry
    • Marked as answer by sjb500 Wednesday, June 17, 2009 3:11 PM
    Tuesday, June 16, 2009 8:24 PM
  • Thanks for these last two suggestions - the second of the two is certainly possible, although it slightly worries me because the users would still effectively have the right to create new Thing1s - something we don't really want. Before we implement the second of these two we are currently testing Nishant's suggestion and I'll post back when we have a decision on which way to go...
    Wednesday, June 17, 2009 8:17 AM
  • Okay, we tried Nishant's suggestion but had the same problem. That means that we will try and implement Jonathan's suggestion. Thanks all!
    Wednesday, June 17, 2009 3:10 PM