Checking and setting fields using automation

[Andy Tran]

I'm attempting to expand on an automation that I have where, when Field A = 123, it sets two other fields with similar values.  However, since this is a one way automation where you need to fill out Field A first in order for the automation to work,  I need to adjust it where, if any point, Fields B/C are populated first, and the other fields are populated in a similar way. 

Example:

Field A

Field B

Field C

Current automation - User adds value "123" to Field A and Field B and C get populated with "123" as well.

Attempting to do:  User adds "123" to any of the Fields A, B, or C, if those other fields do not already have "123" (including empty), then it gets filled in.  

[Gaurav Arora · Accepted solution]

Hi @Andy Tran , Greetings!

To synchronize the values across all three fields, I recommend the following:

1. Include all three fields in both the automation trigger and the edit field action.
2. Implement a smart value condition to prevent accidental removal of values from other fields when a value is removed from one field. This condition can be adjusted or removed based on your specific requirements.

This setup ensures that any changes made to one field are automatically reflected in the other two fields, maintaining data consistency.

If you find this suggestion helpful, please accept the answer so that others can benefit as well!

Best regards,

Gaurav

[Andy Tran]

@Gaurav Arora thanks for this.  I thought it would be more complicated than this.  Appreciate it.

[Bill Sheboy]

Hi @Andy Tran 

Solving the scenario you describe is relatively easy by changing the rule trigger and including some conditions.  However...

What problem are you trying to solve?  That is, "why do this?"

Storing the same information in multiple fields seems likely to cause problems and confusion when people look at the issues.  For example, if there is a rule error, project / field configuration change, Atlassian outage, etc. the rules will not update as expected.

Knowing the problem you are trying to solve may help the community to offer alternative solutions.

Kind regards,
Bill

[Andy Tran]

@Bill Sheboy it doesn't solve the root problem, you're correct.  It's an issue that has been in place since before I started to poke questions into how Jira is being used within our teams/dept.  I've already offered alternative solutions for solving our direct problem with having multiple fields but there's more discussion and "analyst" outside of my findings that I'm waiting to be resolved.

That being said, I'm attempting to find a temporary solution until our issue of having multiple fields is decided on.  

[Bill Sheboy]

Thanks for the information, and you will need at least two rules until the duplication is resolved:

1. One triggered on the fields value changed
2. One triggered on issue created to check if the fields are initially synced.  The "fields value changed trigger" rule will not help for that case.