Feature Requests
Kyle Bonde - Vertical GC Permissions, Project Sharing, and Licensing Flexibility
Short Version:
I’m trying to give my team the freedom to collaborate while still managing security and cost. SSO will help, but these permission and licensing refinements would take it even further.
Thanks for noodling on this with me – happy to clarify or brainstorm further!
Long Version:
As an admin, I recently invited my personal Gmail account to zzTakeoff to understand the experience from a basic takeoff user’s perspective. That surfaced a few key challenges around permissions and user management.
Problem #1: Takeoff Users Can’t Manage Their Own Projects
Right now, if a takeoff user wants to add teammates to a project, they have to ping an admin to do it. That doesn’t scale.
Suggestion: Allow takeoff users to invite others to their project – either with full access or as view-only.
Problem #2: Who Should See What?
This one’s tricky. Should users only see projects they’re explicitly invited to? Or should everyone with the same email domain (e.g., @company.com) have access to everything?
My vote: All employees with the same domain should have access to view and edit all projects by default, especially once SSO is enabled. Let’s make collaboration the default, not the exception.
Problem #3: Admin Overload
Because of these limits, I’ve started making more users admins just so they can manage their own projects. That’s not ideal.
Suggestion: Introduce project-level roles or permissions – something lightweight that empowers users without turning everyone into an admin.
Problem #4: Licensing Friction
The current named-user license model makes it hard to scale access across enterprise.
Idea: What if licensing was activity-based instead? For example:
- If a user logs in or performs 3+ takeoff actions in a month, they count as an active user.
- Otherwise, they don’t count as a user. This way, we pay for usage, not potential – and users can get in, collaborate, and build without gatekeeping.
I would also like to suggest, so here are my 2 cents.
Problem #1:
Suggestion #1: Level Access. Lets say there are 3 levels, (Admin, Manager, User)
Admin is all powerful and can limit certain project as a "Classified" and can't be shared
Managers can give other managers access to their workload as long as it wasn't "Classified", also managers can batch invite or have a "Always Invite"
Users must be given access directly from a higher Level (Invite to Project)
Suggestion #2: Group Access. Lets say there are 2 levels (Group Manager, User) (Admin is invisible)
Group #1 has a list of user they always want on their project. Those users will have access to those projects.
Group #2 has a small list, but like to invite when a project start.
Problem #2:
I like Kyle's suggestion, but could see a problem if its regarding a large company (I am in a small company, so I like sharing to the company as a whole)
Access by default
Suggestion: Project to be open by default, but have certain project be "Classified"
Problem #3:
See Problem #1 Suggestion #1
Similar to Kyle's suggestion, but account wide instead of project level.
Project level I think would work too, but might be a headache if there is a lot of setup every time. Even a minute of sidetrack can be hours of worked depending on the how many project are inputting.
Problem #4:
I liked how PlanSwift did their Seats, even though paying for empty seat suck, there was less management needed.
And the if a seat was taken by an inactive user, you can limit the login time (I do 3 days) then they have to re-login. or do an override.
I really miss the old, buy the software for life thing, but I also know, improvements/upkeep need funding.
I don't really have a suggestion on this one, ether way I think of it, ether not enough money to the zz or value to the user.
Thanks for all the input here. We will discuss ways to reduce the friction and make it easier and better 👍🏻🙂