Our team has identified a module caching issue that requires additional time to resolve. Because of this, we are moving the 2.64.3 US Production release to Tuesday, June 16th. The EU and Canada release remains on schedule for Wednesday, June 17th. We would rather take that time now than introduce a problem into your production environment. Thank you for your continued patience, and please reach out if you have any questions or concerns.

We're releasing version 2.64.4 of Ideagen EHSQ Enterprise on 25 June 2026.Here's what's improved.What's newFaster record creation from the dashboard — the old buried “Create New” button has been replaced with a role-tailored Quick Create toolbar at the top of each dashboard, giving users one-click access to their most-used record types (e.g. New Incident, New Permit) without navigating away. Admins configure which buttons appear per dashboard and per team. Cleaner, less cluttered screens — the record initiation screen now hides the nav rail, breadcrumbs, and excess controls so users can focus on filling in the form. Required fields now show a progress bar (“1 of 14 complete”) with a dropdown that jumps directly to any outstanding field, replacing the old competing side panel. Admins get new configuration power (act before go-live on 25 June 2026) — Quick Create toolbars, org logo white-labelling in the header, module icons/colours in the Create New modal, and a new “Grid: Button Menus”

Hi. New user here! Thanks in advance. My issue is that some of our staff have reported that they do not have the Workload tab on their Home screen of Ideagen Quality Management Professional. Our version is Version 7.9.1.5.As per Capability comparison between the Web and Windows clientshttps://iqm-pro.help.ideagen.com/hc/en-gb/articles/ [removed by moderator] -Capability-comparison-between-the-Web-and-Windows-clientsThis article outlines the current module and feature comparison on each interface, and states that Workload can currently be accessed via both a Web and Windows client. When I log in I can see Home- Workload, My Searchs,Others can only see My Searches. Any idea when this may be and how to add?

The issue affecting our US Production environment has been resolved. Service was restored at approximately 12:00 PM Pacific time.We will be sharing a follow-up post with more details on the root cause. We apologize for the disruption and thank you for your patience.

We are aware of an issue affecting our US Production environment that began at approximately 11:30 AM Pacific time. Our team is actively investigating and working to restore normal service as quickly as possible.We will provide updates as we have more information to share. We apologize for the disruption and appreciate your patience.

Is there a way to get the Revision Number of a document into a footer that will automatically update when a new revision is published? Have had no luck with creating this so far and hoping someone has had success with this issue before.

Good evening, I’ve got a question regarding permissions for CAPA wizard. We would like to give users the ability to add an attachment in a CAPA wizard. And while we can attachments to the wizards, users with “create CA/PA via wizard” permissions are not able to add an attachment. We don’t want to statically assign ‘CA/PA edit attachments’ permissions as we only would like the option of adding attachments in the wizard rather than all users being able to edit attachments in CA/PAs at a later date. Is there a way to achieve this via the wizard? Thanks, Anna

Good day!We are an IQMS professional customer with an Academy integration.There is not a specific ‘Academy Forum’, but I thought that I would ask here. I’m trying to clean out our courses in Academy and there are a number of them that I cannot do anything with. Here is what they look like.Any suggestions?

Hi all, does anybody have have any advice on whether CA/PA from a specific source can be made confidential?  I have a small group of users working on confidential actions that we don’t want to be visible to the rest of the business, is it possible to give view and edit access only to a small group.  Thank you in advance for any help you can offer

Is it just me/my organisation that feels the permission model for CAPA has weaknesses?ignoring static and focusing of dynamic security permissions…we’ve always worked on the basis that:the CAPA owner/creator has full edit permission for a record (along with any associated auditors), the stage owners can only edit any stages they have been assigned as owners and stage action owners can only edit those they own/are assigned.that works fine except when the stage action owners need to attach evidence so that completion of the action can be independently verified. this fails as by default they don't have permission to attach files, and if given ‘add/edit attachments’ they also need the hieratical CAPA edit for that the work.if they are given that permission, then it also allow them to also edit the stages and wider CAPA elements - which breaks the cascading/workflow type control model. incidentally they can also edit the ‘details’ part of an agreed action, as well as the ‘response’, which i

I've successfully added hyperlinks into q-pulse reports and messages, however hyperlinks don't seem to work in the Incident templates (or CAPA templates).I've tried adding the URL address into an incident template, within the stage details - however when that field appears in any messages that incorporates that field, it looks like a hyperlink but the address is not recognised. oddly it does work for an email address link, opening up a new OL email message.i would normally get round this by putting this hyperlink (for user guidance) in the related message(s), however because it not applicable to all forms and message aren't form specific (unlike templates) it doesn't work for our situation/requirements.any suggestions are most welcome.

New to Ideagen, and just trying it out, so apologies for the basic questions. Auditor completed a step, entering the description of work done in the “Comments” field within that planning step. Then set the step to “Completed.” Now I (supervisor) need to review, but I cannot see the text she entered into the Comments field. What are we doing wrong?  Should the auditor not set the test to Completed? If she leaves it open, how do I know it’s ready to review? Thanks!

Is there a way to create an attachment Library?

Hi everyone! 👋Our team is currently building new training resources for version 7.9, focusing on the updated web interface. These materials are designed to make it easier for you to navigate and get the most out of the latest changes.Now we’d love your input!What would you like to see next?Are there specific topics, workflows, or tips that would make a big difference for you and your teams? Maybe deep dives into reporting, best practices for configuration, or quick-start guides for new features?Your ideas help shape what we create—so drop your suggestions in the comments and let’s build something great together!

We are delaying the 2.64.3 release to US Production by one week to allow additional time to ensure quality. The new target date is Thursday, June 11th, 2026. For EU and Canada customers, your environments have not received the 2.64.2 release or its subsequent patches as we've worked through the US environment's production issues. Given that, we have decided to skip the 2.64.2 release entirely and move directly to 2.64.3 which is currently scheduled for Wednesday, June 17th.  We appreciate your understanding and will keep you updated as we move forward.

Recently we requested for Ideagen to develop the way the due date system works to improve functionality and save on time wastage within the business.The current workload functionality is set at the template stage and is purely based on the raised date. This is great in theory, but in the real world, it leads to a lack of efficiency & requires considerable manual intervention with the need for micro-managing all the due dates of stages & actions within the system.As an FYI some of our Q-Pulse processes have 15 or more stages with multiple tasks within each stage.Scenario - We have a process that involves three sequential stages, the current methodology has defined dates as follows:The first stage due date is preset 7 days from the raised date, the second stage due date is preset 12 days from the raised date, and the third stage due date is 16 days from the raised date.In theory, the task will be completed in 16 days and no dates will ever be changed.However, what if the first st

Hi there!  Is there any way to send out emails/escalations to people who have checked out a document and not checked it back in for an x amount of time?  Thanks! 

Hi all,  Documents can sometimes be missed and not distributed to the right people if they have changed roles or if a new person has joined the team and there has not been time to update the copyholder templates. Has anyone else experienced this? Would it be possible to create dynamic copyholder templates, i.e. Distribute document IF Job Role “xyz” is TRUE? If a workaround already exists and I’m not aware, please let me know!! :) Thank you.   Kind regardsMonika Blinstrubyte

Just wondering if anyone could help with distributing document acknowledgement and document review emails from the system.Currently, when the action owners receive the email, all recipient email addresses are visible in the To field. Is there any way to hide these email addresses? Many thanks for helping.  

Hello,We really like the feature that allows us to convert a document (Word, Excel etc.) to a PDF. This can be done either when activating a draft, or when submitting for approval.Of course, we can also convert back again: When an active document is revised into a new draft/active document, and the checkbox to base the new file on a copy of the old is selected, the original attachment (Word/Excel) is made available again. This is great. We don’t need to keep backup copies of the original in other locations (file server etc.).However, in a few cases, such as when needing to make a minor adjustment or typo correction after a document has been made active, but without going through the full revision process, it’s more difficult.This is perhaps an edge case.Example workflow that leads to this issue:Create a Draft document, upload Word file, Activate and Convert to PDF Note a small mistake in the active document. Edit the document, delete the attachment, upload a new file and save.The probl

How do I archive a user with outstanding workload? This used to be straightforward in the system where you could go to Admin > People > Select User > Archive however. since this function has moved to the Admin Console / User Management on the web I’m struggling to do this. I have managed to make the user ‘Inactive’ in the admin module but can’t find where the outstanding workload has went for this user. I have checked the section for reassigning ownership in advanced workload and it is not there.

When I used Qpulse some years ago, it had the functionality of downloading some audit checklists based on ISO standards. Is this option still available?

How to resent the login details to new users? They were unable to reset the password.

After the rollout of our latest release to US production, we identified performance issues that need to be addressed before we proceed with the EU and Canada deployments.We are delaying those releases while we resolve and validate the fix. The EU and Canada datacenters will receive the release on June 3, 2026.Thank you for your patience while we get this right.

This afternoon (May 27, 15:30–16:15 CDT) we deployed a set of targeted improvements to our US Production environment intended to address what we believe to be the primary contributors to the slower response times reported since the 2.64.2 release on May 15. There was some service interruption during the deploy window itself, which a few of you may have noticed; the environment settled shortly after 16:15 CDT.Early indications since the deploy are encouraging. Common actions like Open, Save, and Submit are responding more quickly than they were over the past several days. We want to be transparent, however: monitoring continues, and it is still possible that response times will not fully return to the levels customers experienced prior to 2.64.2. If that is the case, our investigation will continue.As with the prior update, the European and Canadian data centers remain on the previous release and are unaffected by both the original regression and the changes we have now applied to US. W