Bring back the option to import contacts to an existing static list

The new import change has just caused me so much more work. Previously, I could choose to import contacts to an exsting list, and I had a static lsit that was linked to a communicaitons workflow. I was able to import and automate communications in one step.

 

Now, I have to import a list, create a new list, then enroll that list in a workflow. A one step process just became a three step process. I thought HubSpot was supposed to make my work simplier, not add more steps?

HubSpot updates
17 Replies
EDickmann
New Contributor

I completely agree. I do like that imports do not automatically create a new static list but losing the ability to add imported contacts during the import process to an existing list is a real issue. Not only is it more steps, but if you have workflows running that exclude contacts based on certain lists, the newly imported contacts could be enrolled in a workflow before the additional steps to add them to a list are completed. This literally could result in contacts being inadvertently emailed inbetween getting them imported, creating a new list and then adding them to an existing list.

cpatrick
Regular Contributor

Absolutely! I had seveal workflows already tied to static lists that I would update weekly with imports and now I have to change my whole process. 

 

Here's a similar post regarding the same issue. If you want, you can upvote this one too, so that we can gain as much attention as possible to get HubSpot to bring back that option: https://community.hubspot.com/t5/HubSpot-Ideas/Please-revert-imported-lists-to-their-original-email/...

Vanessa1
Regular Contributor

Yes, I agree you have made importing more difficult with more steps. Also, when I go to contacts after the import and add to a list then the button is greyed-out if I choose more than 25 contacts. Therefore I have to do it 4 times if lets's say I have 100 contacts. 

cpatrick
Regular Contributor

@Vanessa1, I had that same issue. I got on chat with someone to see if that was gltich and they encouted the same. I don't undersrand why they have it blocked to not be able to select all to add to a Workfow. Why would we only want to add a random part of an import list to a workflow?

theScott
Regular Contributor

I emphatically support this idea.


Old method:
1. Upload contacts to existing static list.
2. Workflow is triggered.

New method:

First: Either add a Lifecycle Stage field to your upload, or update your workflow to set the Lifecycle Stage property. This was previously handled during the upload process.

1. Upload contacts.
2. From Imports screen, click More > New List.

3. Name your new list.

4. Wait ## minutes for new list to populate (time depends on list size).
5. Click checkbox to select all contacts in current view.
6. Click "Select all ### contacts" text link.
7. Click More > Add to Static List.

8. Workflow is triggered.

 

Sidenote:

Don't bother clicking the "View Contacts" button on the Import screen. You can neither add all contacts to a static list nor create a new List from that screen. You can only add some contacts to a static list from there. The option to add to a static list is made unavailable after you select all contacts.

cdutoit
Occasional Contributor

100% AGREE!

 

This has completely broken our internal lead management process, and at the same time convoluting the entire process. I welcome some of the positive steps (supporting excel, reducing clutter etc), but not being able to add to an existing list has caused a massive disruption.

 

We have workflows triggered off of lists. Now when importing we have to go through a convoluted set of steps to accomplish what was an easy task.

djames93
New Contributor

I couldn't agree more. What was once a simple process has become unnecessarily long-winded and will create us a lot more work in the future. Really unimpressed with Hubspot and when querying on chat the reasons given didn't really make any sense in all honesty. Seriously hoping they reverse this ridiculous decision.

SamanthaFrancis
Visitor

I agree! It was SO much easier, user friendly and QUICK the old way. What was intended to be improved by making this change?

mcastens
New Contributor

I signed up just to say I would love to see this back as well Smiley Happy

sarahg-greeley
New Contributor

We need the functionality back too!