Ability to not require a Primary Phone Number
Within Database view, it is not required to mark a phone as the primary. This ability should be ported over to NXT for full cross-compatibility. (For example, my organization only marks emails as primary, but not phone numbers as someone may have multiple numbers they use)
-
Catie Wools
- Mar 12 2025
- Reviewed: Voting Open
Related ideas
We may not know the primary but constituent has provided several.
May not be an active to mark as primary - why require it?
Constituents can have multiple phone they use and don't always have a primary.
I agree. Inactive, opt-outs, bounced emails, and deceased record phone number/emails should not have to be marked primary.
There are cases when there is only one phone number on the record, but it's been proven to be outdated, and no longer a means to contact them. Being forced to mark such a phone number (or email) as primary in these circumstances is not ideal.
We mark emails and phones as inactive when they are no longer in use. If they only have the one email, it results in them having an inactive email also marked as primary.
When a constituent is deceased, we do not want them to have a primary email or phone number. We would like the ability to remove the primary indicator from all contact types.