Planning Mode for Workload view — suppress notifications until plan is confirmed (+ revert option)
Sergio Sapuppo
The Workload view is a powerful tool for resource leveling and smoothing — but rebalancing is inherently iterative. You rarely get the allocation right on the first pass: you move tasks, check capacity, move them again.
The issue: every single adjustment (date shift, reassignment) immediately fires a notification to the assignee. By the end of a planning session, team members have dozens of notifications in their Inbox — many of them already outdated, because the plan changed again before they read them. With desktop notifications enabled, the noise is constant.
The real damage isn't just the clutter: people learn to ignore ClickUp notifications altogether, which erodes trust in the tool exactly where it matters most.
Proposed solution
A "Planning Mode" for the Workload view (and potentially Gantt/Timeline):
- The planner activates Planning Mode and rebalances freely — no notifications are sent while it's active.
- On "Confirm plan", assignees receive ONE consolidated notification per person summarizing their final changes (e.g. "3 tasks rescheduled, 1 reassigned to you").
- A "Discard / revert to original plan" option restores all dates and assignments to their pre-session state.
- Optionally, exiting the view without confirming prompts: confirm & notify, or discard.
Why it matters
For mid-size and enterprise teams doing weekly capacity planning across multiple delivery teams, this is the difference between Workload being a true planning tool and a notification cannon. It also aligns naturally with the Workload v2 direction (Work by Day, second-level grouping): the more granular the editing, the more changes per session — and the more urgent batched notifications become.
Related: it would also be great to export the Workload view as PDF/PNG, as already possible for Gantt — see also the existing request on exporting utilization percentages.
Log In
s
sk W
Good Job! I have a new idea to add to this proposal. The "notification cannon" problem is real, and as Gabriele pointed out, the erosion of trust in notifications is the most damaging side effect.
One complementary thought: beyond just batching notifications, the content of those notifications should scale with task priority. Not every change deserves the same level of detail.
For Urgent/High priority tasks, assignees need the full picture – what changed (status, due date, assignee), who did it, and where the task lives. For Low/Backlog tasks, a simple "task updated" (or even silence) is often enough.
The goal: when a high-priority notification lands, the team knows it matters – because they haven't been conditioned to ignore the noise.
A practical mapping we've been exploring:
Priority Notification verbosity
Urgent Full details: who, when, changed field + new value, assignee, comment preview, location
High Core details: status/assignee/date changes only
Low Minimal: "task updated" – no specific values
None/Backlog No notification
This way, Planning Mode solves the volume problem, and priority-based verbosity solves the signal problem. Together, they'd make ClickUp notifications actually trustworthy again.
Gabriele Vitale
Great reasoning, and the point about eroding trust is exactly the real issue.
Adding a field perspective: the damage isn't limited to redundant notifications. When team members start systematically ignoring ClickUp notifications, a subtle but serious side effect kicks in — critical notifications (a real deadline, a final reassignment) get buried in the noise. The tool stops being a reliable channel precisely when it matters most.
The Planning Mode you're proposing would solve this, but I'd suggest a small refinement to point 2:
The consolidated notification would be even more actionable if it distinguished between structural changes (reassignment, project change) and scheduling adjustments (date shifts, priority reordering). A PM moving 15 tasks by one day to accommodate a holiday doesn't carry the same communicative weight as reassigning 3 tasks to a different person entirely. Giving assignees that distinction at a glance would further reduce cognitive load on their end.
On rollback: having a pre-session snapshot is critical, especially for cross-team planning sessions where the PM doesn't have full visibility into all dependencies. A before/after diff view before confirming would be even more powerful than a plain restore — letting planners catch unintended consequences before they go live.
On Workload export as PDF/PNG: fully agree, it's an unexplainable gap compared to Gantt, especially for teams using Workload as a reporting tool toward stakeholders and leadership.