Thanks for kicking off the discussion @Jason Baulch! I’ve converted this post from a “Question” to a “Discussion” so the replies can be ongoing and doesn’t have to be closed off with a best answer.

Are you thinking of using Assets for this because it can include pictures, and you can see the history of results tied to that area (as an Asset)?

Currently in my company, we have global (and template-specific) response sets for areas like outside grounds, warehouse, material room, production area, etc.  I don’t think we have templates that drill down to documenting finite parts of a room such as warehouse aisles though.  For example in our templates, this allows us to know where a problem occurred or what part of the property is being inspected.  Sometimes, those selections are used to build the report title.  If we want to trend or drill down by area, we have to use Power BI.

A feature idea is to add to each “site” the ability to add sub “areas.”  For each Site and Area, we could add details like Address, Description, and Picture.  I would not want to lose the higher level “site” selection while conducting and inspection, so I would want a new “site section” field type that provides a dropdown of the sub “areas” for the “site” you selected on the Title Page.  Then, similar to Assets, the “Sites” page could provide a history of actions and inspections tied to that site and site’s areas.

@Corey, yes i want to tie everything together for particular areas. The idea of going to the asset and having the entire history has great advantages. However, I find that activating assets in a template means you have find the right one by asset number. This is ok for say, fleet, where you can use registration # but even then, a lot of vehicles under the same group has isnt convenient. Hoping there's another way.

@Jason Baulch would the proposal I suggested solve that need?  I could see our sites possibly liking something like that too.  Basically, expanding how Sites work and build out some features like Assets have, but less complex since you don’t need as many details or documents probably.
 

• Add to each “site” the ability to add sub “areas.” 
• For each Site and Area, be able to add details like Address, Description, and Picture. 
• Still have the existing “Site” field in templates.
• Add a new “site area" field which contains a dropdown of the sub “areas” for the “site” you selected on the Title Page.
• Similar to Assets, the “Sites” page could provide a history of actions and inspections tied to that site and each site’s sub areas.

@Corey I think you’re right. I will do some testing and see how it looks. Appreciate your insight.

Maybe this post should be moved to feature Ideas if modifying how Sites work is useful, rather than trying to mold Assets for a different purpose. 

Looking at the Site Matrix structure it could use the extra field for sub areas/sites. Or I could have the set up all wrong. My logic would have it as Region > Site > Area

If you click the settings to customize Site Labels, when you remove any changes you made, you’ll see what their default intention was. Site is what you are selecting, so they have that as the lowest level.

I had mine set long ago before this capability came out, so in the “Region” field I place our production process which defines the plant type and in the “Area” field I have the state.  I’m not using the 2 higher levels (defaulted to Country and State).  There is no way to rearrange the existing structure currently.

If they added “Room” (but customizable label still) as a level below the “Site” that would allow what you’re talking about.  Then, just like how Assets work, you can set it to only show rooms that apply to that Site (assets show only assets that apply to that site and if set on the field, also the category of asset).  I see what you’re saying by swapping Area and Site.  That would work too, but they’d have to move things up a level for people using the existing Area field.  I’m not sure how many people use 4 structure levels above sites anyway.

Then add Sites as a main feature on the left navigation, and when you drill down to a site or a room in a site, you can see a picture of it and the activity associated to it.

Ok, your structure is different to mine but better suited to what I’m trying to achieve.

If I move everything up a level, the structure will work. Or as you’ve structured it and move up 2 levels I can use:

• Area = Branch/Building
• Site = Area/Zone within the building

Ideally for my OCD I’d want Site to be above Area.  I agree, being “able to rearrange the structure” would be beneficial.

Now if only there was a way to ‘bulk’ transfer members from site to area?

You can use the “Site Matrix” to change where everyone is assigned in a big grid.  You can also do a CSV upload.  With the upload, it lets you download the current structure and who is in each site.  You can adjust pretty easily and upload back.  

However, what you want to do as far as “Warehouse” goes isn’t going to work that great as they have it designed currently.  You could put the “Sydney” site as the level above Site (where they default the label to Area), then assign your members to that higher level rather than the actual site level which you will instead use for rooms like Warehouse. The downside is during inspections/actions, you would then have “rooms” to assign them to instead of the actual site.  You could make one with the same name as the site I guess.

NSW → Sydney (assign all site members to this higher level which is not actually the “site” field)

NSW → Sydney → Sydney

NSW → Sydney → Warehouse

NSW → Sydney → Production

But you still won’t have the features like Assets where you can see all activity associated to it, since they haven’t built anything like that.

Hi @Jason Baulch 

Just catching up on this thread and tagging @Jacob Tait in it too who is working on the site feature at the moment.

With regard to your comment near the start of the discussion you mentioned finding the correct asset during an inspection was a challenge due to the long list a user has to scroll through. We have made a few tweaks in the product to make this easier.

1. Starting an inspection from the asset list or profile will prefill the site and asset in the inspection. You could use asset qr codes to take a user to the profile and start the inspection that way. 
2. You can customise the asset response type in the template to only apply to certain types of assets instead of showing all assets.
3. If your site question is above your asset question in the template, once a site is selected, the list of assets automatically applies a filter so you only see assets from that site. If you use this in combination with point #2, the list to select from will just be assets of that type, and at that site. Ie: just show a list vehicles from Site B.