Get Started
Get Inspiration
Groups
Events
Ideas
Release Hub

Start a Post
Log in

Home
Ideas

Ideas

Want to shape the future of Docusign? Add your ideas for dream features and upvote others you love.

Featured topics

How to Use the Ideas Feature

What you need to know about Docusign Community IdeasThis guide will walk you through the process of sharing your ideas, voting on existing ideas, and...

Forum|Forum|2 years ago

22190

Update on the status of submitted ideas

Hi everyone! We’ve heard your questions about the status of submitted ideas in the Ideas forum.Internally, the Docusign team is actively reviewing you...

Forum|Forum|1 year ago

9448

Filter by Idea status

Filter by category

983 Ideas

Most Replies

Most Votes

Newest First

J.MahonNewcomer

Enhancement Request: Support for Multi‑Word First Names in Recipient FieldsDuplicate

Proposed Enhancement:Some recipients have multi‑word first names (for example, names like “Mary Anne” or “Jean Paul”). When these names are entered into a template, Docusign interprets the second word as a middle name and only transfers the first word into the “First Name” fields. This leads to incomplete or inaccurate recipient information in templates.It would be helpful to have a way to correctly capture multi‑word first names. This could be supported through a sender‑side function, an optional field setting, or another mechanism that ensures the full first name is preserved when mapping recipient data into template fields.

Forum|Forum|8 days ago

AP-EMDNew Voice

Behavior of Standard First & Last Name fieldsParked

Our company manages a couple hundred DocuSign accounts for our customers. Many of the forms used require “First Name” and “Last Name” & so we use the Standard name field & change it from Full Name to either First Name or Last Name, as needed. However, we have found that the expected behavior of those fields in DocuSign is to pull in the first word of each name rather than the full name. For example, if my first name is Mary Ann (not Mary), using the Standard First Name field only pulls in Mary, which is incorrect. If my last name is Smith Jones, the Standard Last Name field only pulls in Smith.We are using these fields for legal documents & the format happens to sometimes ask for First Name vs Last Name, which is why we can’t use the Standard Full Name field as a work-around. In addition, although Custom First & Last Name fields will also work, it’s extra clicks to go get those, they are harder to copy/paste, & it’s harder to educate users to select those when the Standard fields are the first thing you see.Please update the behavior of the Standard First & Last name fields to pull in the full text that a user identifies as the First or Last name.

Forum|Forum|8 days ago

KellieNNewcomer

Enhancement Request - make webform fully available in language other than what Docusign account is set up asIdea Submitted

The request is to have a web form fully available in a language other than what the account is set up as for all recipients/signers.The language for non-configurable "system" labels and descriptions (these are error messages and other non-configurable text (for example, "Loading…", Finish Later, Next, Back, etc.) on the form as well text in the header/footer of invitation and completion emails) is determined when the web form is initially created based on the form creator's language settings in their Docusign account. Updating the web form configuration file as well as branding worked for the first recipient/signer to have their web form fully available in another language other than the account. However, this did not affect the experience of the second recipient/signer - their non-configurable "system" labels and descriptions were still only available in the language of the Docusign account.

Forum|Forum|8 days ago

DELDRIDGEFBBNewcomer

Enhancement Request - Recipient Authentication Skip OptionIdea Submitted

The account-wide "Recipient Authentication Skip Option" rules exclusively apply to the legacy KBA (ID Check) engine. Because the newer KBA on IDV platform is built on an entirely separate, high-security identity architecture, it enforces re-authentication on every single transaction. It deliberately does not support or inherit the 24-hour browser-caching or "remember this signer" settings.If an organization chooses to use Recipient Authentication Skip Option settings, it should apply to any authentication method used by the organization. Limiting it to a single form of authentication results in mixed client experiences when senders are using different forms of authentication. This is also not user friendly when Salesforce only uses legacy KBA while Docusign direct can use a variety of authentication methods. Organizations should be able to have modern authentication and consistency across system usage.

Forum|Forum|11 days ago

DELDRIDGEFBBNewcomer

Reporting for envelopes - creation to completionIdea Submitted

We need a single report that captures every activity from the time and envelope is created until it is completed to show a full history for researching. This includes templates used, authentication method changes, resend or corrections performed, and file name for each document in an envelope. Right now, multiple reports and the certificate of completion have to be pieced together to research. Ex. Fraud occurs and you want to know who sent the envelope, who it was sent to, all documents in the envelope, if a template was used, changes to the template authentication, pass/fail status of every authentication attempt, resend/correction steps, and any other activity that occurred in the process.

Forum|Forum|11 days ago

daniel.krcmarDigital Collaborator

CLM Report Exports: Export numeric columns as actual number values in Excel (not text)Idea Submitted

When exporting a CLM report to Excel, numeric columns (e.g. contract Value) are exported as text instead of numbers. Excel only recognizes the value as a number after manually double-clicking into each cell. This behavior also interacts poorly with regional settings (e.g. Dutch locale, where the decimal separator is a comma), making the values unusable without manual conversion.Customers use exported reports for downstream analysis — SUM, COUNT, pivot tables, financial reconciliation. With values exported as text, none of these Excel functions work out of the box. For reports with hundreds or thousands of rows, manually converting each cell is not workable. Support has confirmed this is currently expected behavior, but for business users the export is effectively broken for its main purpose: calculating on numeric data.Enhancement:Export numeric and currency columns with a proper Excel number data type (e.g. via native XLSX cell typing), not as text. Respect the user's locale/regional settings (decimal and thousands separators) so values parse correctly in Dutch/European Excel configurations. Optionally: allow the report designer to define the data type per column (text / number / currency / date) for exports.Workaround today: Manually double-click each cell, or use Excel's Text-to-Columns / VALUE() conversion — both impractical at scale.

Forum|Forum|12 days ago

sahil.shettyNewcomer

Add formatting control for [[Data:DocumentNames]] merge field (line-separated / list output)Idea Submitted

The [[Data:DocumentNames]] merge field renders all document names as a single comma-separated string. Please add support for controlling how the list is formatted — at minimum a line-break/newline delimiter, ideally a bulleted or line-separated list option.Problem / use case:When an envelope contains several documents, a comma-separated string on a single line is hard to scan. Recipients skim the notification email quickly, and a run-on list makes it easy to miss that multiple documents are enclosed. This is especially relevant in regulated industries (e.g. financial services) where signers need to clearly see each form they are being asked to sign. Presenting each document name on its own line materially improves readability and reduces recipient confusion.Requested behavior:A supported option to output document names one per line (or as a bulleted list) instead of comma-separated — controllable within the email body / Email Resource file. For example, a delimiter parameter on the merge field, or a companion merge field that emits a formatted list.Current behavior (confirmed with DocuSign Support, Case #17666072):The merge field does not support any formatting options. Output is always comma-separated, the behavior is identical across signer/sender/CC notifications and within Email Resource files, and there is no alternative merge field, repeatable region, or formatting mechanism to display names on separate lines. Support advised submitting this as an enhancement request.Impact if delivered:Clearer, more readable signer notifications; fewer "which documents am I signing?" support questions; better experience for envelopes with multiple documents.

Forum|Forum|13 days ago

CFranzkeNewcomer

Change colour of 'message from the admin'Idea Submitted

As account admin one can set a custom message that shows as banner at the top of screen (https://support.docusign.com/s/document-item?language=en_US&bundleId=pik1583277475390&topicId=zzj1584562722803.html&_LANG=enus)It would improve the user experience (not only for the admin but more importantly of end users) if the color of banner could be set/changed for different messages. For example, set it to green for regular tips/info but to red for critical messages that users should observe.

Forum|Forum|13 days ago

momathewsonNew Voice

Reporting for envelopes/agreements that include DocuSign PaymentsIdea Submitted

Reporting for envelopes/agreements that include DocuSign Payments

Forum|Forum|14 days ago

lkatwlnNew Voice

Searchable Party HierachiesIdea Submitted

When multiple hierarchies are assigned to a single party, finding the right one becomes difficult. Adding a search function at hierarchy level would significantly improve navigation and efficiency.

Forum|Forum|14 days ago

PslimNew Voice

Agreement Manager - Use Folder-Level Path as Categorization Metadata on Bulk UploadIdea Submitted

When bulk uploading agreements into Agreement Manager, categorization currently relies on AI content analysis after ingest, or manual assignment to agreement types/categories/sets. There's no way to leverage the folder structure of the files being uploaded (e.g., from a mapped drive or cloud storage) as a source of categorization metadata.Many organizations already store historical agreements in a meaningful folder hierarchy, such as:/Sales/MSAs/2026//Procurement/Vendor Agreements/2026/Today, this structure is lost on upload — every file lands in Agreement Manager as an individual record, categorized only by what the AI infers from the document content, or by tags applied manually afterward.Request: When uploading a folder (or nested folders) of agreements, allow the folder path to be captured and mapped to categorization fields, for example:Auto-populate or suggest an agreement type, category, department, or custom field based on the folder name(s) in the path Let admins define a mapping between folder structure and metadata fields before or during upload (e.g., top-level folder → Department, second-level folder → Agreement Type) Preserve the original folder path as a searchable attribute on the agreement record, even if the user doesn't set up a mappingWhy it matters: Migrating agreements from network drives, SharePoint, or other DMS tools into Agreement Manager means re-doing categorization work that already exists in the folder structure. Using folder-level information would speed up migration, reduce manual tagging, and give AI categorization a stronger starting signal instead of relying on content inference alone.

Forum|Forum|14 days ago

PslimNew Voice

Agreement Manager - Party Hierarchy / Grouping in Agreement Manager (distinct from Merge)Idea Submitted

Today, Agreement Manager only supports two party actions: Merge and Set As Internal Party. There's no way to represent a parent-subsidiary or affiliate relationship between two distinct parties without collapsing them into a single record via Merge.This is a problem when parties are legally separate entities but organizationally related — e.g.:Company A └─ Subsidiary BMerging isn't appropriate here because Company A and Subsidiary B are separate legal entities, each with their own agreements, obligations, and signing authority. Merging would incorrectly consolidate their agreement history and identity.Request: Add a "Group" / hierarchy action alongside Merge and Set As Internal Party, allowing users to link parties as parent/child (or peer group) without merging their records. This would let users:Define a hierarchy (e.g., Company A as parent, Subsidiary B as child) Roll up or filter agreements by hierarchy, to see all agreements tied to a corporate family, not just one legal entity Keep each party's agreements, obligations, and identity intact and separateWhy it matters: Without this, users either merge parties incorrectly (losing entity separation) or have no way to see cross-entity agreement relationships at all, making it hard to assess total exposure/relationship with a corporate group.

Forum|Forum|14 days ago

crystalrataNewcomer

Broken ButtonsIdea Submitted

For the past 4-6 months there are a number of invisible buttonsFor a simple signing, once you’ve selected that you agree, there is a hidden button just to the right of the options dropdown.The image below isn’t the exact same screen you’ll be seeing, but it does show where the hidden button appears. Once you move your mouse over the area, the button should become light grey and clickable.We need this fixed or we will find another singing platfom solution. What to include in your feedback:Provide the following information to help us improve your experience: What you were doing: Sending Envelope or trying to sign inside a loggied-in platfrom account. Several buttons are invisible and can only be found if you know where they are an hover over them. I am using Chrome Version 149.0.7827.201 (Official Build) (arm64), but other users have also reported the issue What you expected to happen: That you can visibly see the buttons that you have to press What actually happened: The button hidden until rolled over.

Forum|Forum|14 days ago

JanSpacekNew Voice

Improve error message for DS EU Advanced access code character limitIdea Submitted

Description:When a DS EU Advanced recipient has an access code longer than 12 characters, the transaction fails with this error message:"The signature provider option value is not valid. Signature provider option: onetimepassword value is not valid."Problem: This error message is unclear and does not tell the user what actually went wrong. It does not mention that the access code exceeds the 12-character limit. Suggested improvements: Make the error message specific – for example: "Access code for DS EU Advanced recipient exceeds the maximum of 12 characters. Please shorten the access code and try again." This change would save customers time, reduce support tickets, and improve the overall user experience.This is raised based on the ticket - 17618536, as was suggested by the DS support as only way to improve the error message.

Forum|Forum|15 days ago

Hr.PIAautNewcomer

Option to Disable Email TrackingIdea Submitted

Dear DocuSign Product Management,We would like to submit a feature request regarding a significant email delivery issue that we are currently experiencing.A large number of DocuSign emails fail to reach our recipients because they are quarantined or blocked by our email security solutions. The root cause is the invisible tracking pixel and its associated tracking link embedded in DocuSign emails. Our security policies identify this URL as a tracking service, resulting in the email being blocked.The tracking pixel is automatically loaded when the recipient opens the email and is used to determine whether and when the email was opened, as well as the recipient's IP address, geographic region, and email client.According to DocuSign Support, it is currently not possible to disable this tracking functionality. We were advised to submit this request to the DocuSign Product Management team for consideration.We therefore request that DocuSign provide an optional administrator setting to completely disable email tracking. This would allow organizations with strict security and privacy requirements to receive DocuSign emails reliably without having to create exceptions for tracking domains or relax existing security policies.As this behavior directly affects the delivery of business-critical documents and can delay or even prevent signature workflows, we kindly ask that this feature request be treated with high priority and considered for a future product release.Thank you for your time and for considering this request.

Forum|Forum|15 days ago

lkatwlnNew Voice

Contract Type Configuration EnhancementsIdea Submitted

Contract details can become cluttered with standard fields that are not needed for a specific contract type. As a result, users may struggle to identify which fields are actually relevant, leading to a less intuitive experience and unnecessary follow-up questions. This limitation is especially apparent for DocuSign-provided contract types, where unused standard fields cannot currently be hidden.Two related enhancements could improve the user experience:1. Allow standard fields to be hidden for DocuSign contract typesAdministrators should be able to hide unused standard fields on a contract type level, including for DocuSign-provided contract types. This would reduce visual clutter, simplify manual data entry, and provide users with a clearer view of the fields that actually matter.2. Allow custom field ordering within categoriesAdministrators should be able to define the order of fields within a category. This would make it possible to arrange fields according to a logical workflow or business process, rather than a fixed system-defined order.

Forum|Forum|15 days ago

jenniferjanetNewcomer

The checkbox should actually be a checkmarkDuplicate

The checkbox field leaves an "X" and not an actual checkmark. The radio dial field does the same thing. This is disappointing and should function as indicated.

Forum|Forum|18 days ago

Hengfeng GeHero

checkbox is checked in Docusign, it becomes ✅ and show as X after signingParked

When checkbox is checked in Docusign, it becomes ✅ and show as X after signing, and this X is not easy to understand, and we hope it will continue to ✅ be displayed FreeLink/甫连信息🌍 DocuSign Partner | Partner Profile🏆 2024 APAC Reseller Growth Partner of the Year🔧 The first in APAC to pass the DocuSign eSignature Technical Consultant certification.🚀 Expertise in DocuSign integrations with on-premises systems for leading enterprises across various industries.Feel free to reach out for collaboration opportunities.

Forum|Forum|18 days ago

lkatwlnNew Voice

Bundle Main Contracts and Appendices into One Agreement with only one set of contract detailsIdea Submitted

The current hierarchy feature doesn’t fully address our needs. While it allows agreements to be linked (works for interlinked contracts), all documents still remain separate agreements within Agreement Manager (becomes problematic when linking appendices, e.g. important provisions, such as terms and conditions, are defined in appendices rather than the main contract).Many of our agreements consist of a main contract and multiple appendices. When each document is stored separately, appendices appear as standalone agreements with own contract details, cluttering search results and making it harder to understand the contractual relationship and the contract situation of our company.A bundling feature would allow users to designate a Primary Agreement and associate all related appendices with it. Within Agreement Manager, only the Primary Agreement should appear as the agreement record, while appendices remain accessible through the bundle.In addition, key metadata and lifecycle attributes—such as status, term dates, and renewal dates—should be managed at the Primary Agreement level and automatically inherited by all bundled documents (there’s only one set of details for all documents). This would provide a more accurate representation of the agreement and prevent appendices from being treated as separate contract, including searches, reports, and dashboards.

Forum|Forum|18 days ago

DebKoscinskiNew Voice

Docusign Popup after moving envelope to folderIdea Submitted

PLEASE add a turn off box for the new notification every time you move an envelope to another folder as it is SUPER ANNOYING!! It stays there until you close out EVERY popup notification.

Forum|Forum|18 days ago

Cdamro00New Voice

Webform notifications when a form is filled outIdea Submitted

The inability to get an email notification when a Public webform (created from scratch) is filled out is mind boggling. Like if there is a public webform people want to know when it’s been completed. I actually created 2 cases to get help with this because I didn’t believe the first support person when I was told it wasn’t possible. just to be clearI created a webform from scratch. It’s public facing, and does not require a signature. when it’s filled out by a customer there is now way for me to get a notification. unbelievable

Forum|Forum|19 days ago

debbykellyNewcomer

Add last login date to user reportingIdea Submitted

With DocuSign moving to a license based model, having the last date the user logged in as a reporting option would help with analysis regarding who should and shouldn’t keep a license.

Forum|Forum|19 days ago

lkatwlnNew Voice

Make the term "Agreement Manager" visible within the User InterfaceIdea Submitted

Agreement Manager is intended to serve as the central location for storing and managing executed agreements and is consistently promoted under this name. The current user interface doesn´t clearly communicate this purpose. Users may not immediately recognize where the Agreement Manager functionality can be accessed, as finalized agreements are located under Completed Documents. This label suggests a document status rather than the dedicated Agreement Manager experience, making it less intuitive for users to identify where executed agreements are centrally stored and managed.Idea: Displaying the term Agreement Manager directly within the application.

Forum|Forum|19 days ago

gordonchangNewcomer

Introduce Filters for the Homepage Tasks Widget in Docusign Mobile App (Distinguish Personal vs. Group Tasks)Idea Submitted

As a Department Head managing multiple contract workflows, I want to be able to filter my task queue on the Docusign Mobile App homepage widget, So that I can easily distinguish between tasks directly assigned to me individually and shared tasks assigned to my CLM Groups.Current Pain Point: Currently, joining a CLM Group floods the mobile app's task widget with all group-level tasks, making the queue cluttered and hard to streamline. There is no option to filter or sort these tasks on the mobile app homepage. To keep the mobile app clean, users are forced to avoid joining CLM groups entirely, which disrupts standard workflow best practices.Proposed Solution: Please add a simple toggle or filter dropdown (e.g., "Assigned to Me" vs. "Group Tasks") within the mobile app's homepage task pane to help managers streamline their daily task queues efficiently.Background:Mobile App only support 200 Task onlyrefer case#17519910 - CLM Task show in Dousign app17513679 - User mobile app show We're unable to load you task

Forum|Forum|19 days ago

LUIZ VALUZObserver

Bulk signing in the DocuSign systemDuplicate

Currently, DocuSign does not have a native bulk signing feature that allows a signer to simply select "sign all" without opening each envelope or document individually. It would be beneficial if signers had the option to bulk-sign documents they themselves have sent out for signature.

Forum|Forum|19 days ago