4

I have territory already setup with more than 1000 territories. I have seen that roles are not assigned in the org. In roles introduction page, I can see "Territory based Heirarchy" as 1 of the option.

It seems territories allow only few standard objects to control visibility. Do I need to set up roles in order to restrict record visibilty according to territories for custom object?

This question is about the older Territory Management feature, not the newer Enterprise Territory Management feature.

10

The primary difference between the two is the question of "how many"?

In the role hierarchy, you are allowed one role as a user. So if I am in a sales hierarchy where it is only regional (East, Central, West, for instance), no problem.

But what if I also have an industry vertical, and I need to be in both East, and the Manufacturing vertical?

This is the intended purpose of territories. In territories, I can be given record access based on two or more factors. I can be in one territory that identifies my geographical location, and the industry vertical and Account size (and as many other factors, potentially as I need).

But I've never implemented it. In fact few have implemented the new Territory Management features as it is a recent addition and replaces the old ugly Territory Management feature. So don't take my word for it, download the guide.

As to why your custom objects don't seem to be playing ball, that is explained in the guide where it states:

Territory management only affects accounts and the standard objects that have a master-detail relationship to accounts. For example, opportunities are included in territory management but leads are not.

So for record-level permissions (also sometimes referred to as the Sharing Model, record access, record visibility) for custom objects, you must use roles and the role hierarchy.

  • Thanks for the great answer. I have 1 question. The child objects has lookup relation to Account. So if I change them to master detail, I would be able to control the custom object's visibility through territory management, isn't? – MnZ Sep 29 '14 at 12:57
  • The way I read that statement, no. I don't consider any standard relationships to be "master-detail", but it says quite clearly that Territory works on standard objects, not custom. But give it a try. – pchittum Sep 29 '14 at 12:59
  • I will give it a try. Shouldn't the detail side in a MD should inherit the security settings from parent or the Territory Management doesn't work that way? I'm confused – MnZ Sep 29 '14 at 13:54
  • For Owner, Role Hierarchy, Sharing Rules, Manual Sharing, yes. That is the case. But if a feature doesn't apply to custom objects at all (for example Auto response rules) then it just doesn't apply. In this instance, like I said, I'm not an expert, I know what has been explained to me in the past, and what that doc states. – pchittum Sep 29 '14 at 15:01
2

The way I read that announcement, no. I don't consider any standard connections to be "ace detail", however it trueessayhelp says obviously that Territory chips away at standard items, not custom. However, try it out. –

protected by Community Feb 17 '17 at 11:54

Thank you for your interest in this question. Because it has attracted low-quality or spam answers that had to be removed, posting an answer now requires 10 reputation on this site (the association bonus does not count).

Would you like to answer one of these unanswered questions instead?

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.