Skip to main content
Grupo em destaque

* Marketing Cloud Engagement *

Welcome! This group is dedicated to your success with Salesforce Marketing Cloud Engagement. Join the conversation here to stay up to date on the product, learn best practices, and everything in between. Use this group to review resources, ask questions, help each other, and share experiences. --------------------------------------- This group is maintained and moderated by Salesforce employees. The content received in this group falls under the official Forward-Looking Statement: http://investor.salesforce.com/about-us/investor/forward-looking-statements/default.aspx

We’re happy to share Winter ‘27 Release resources! 🩵 

 

 

🚨 BONUS: Get ready for FeatureFest at Dreamforce! 🚨 Discover what’s new in the Winter ’27 release, get personalized feature recommendations, connect with experts, earn exclusive swag, and leave ready to get more from Salesforce – all in one exciting Dreamforce experience. Stay tuned – we’ll share more details next week!

16 comentários
0/9000
Hi. I’m considering taking the MKT 101 course recommended on trailhead to prep for the SFMC email specialist exam. It’s not cheap so I was wondering if anyone has taken it and has any advice on if it’s necessary, helpful or worth the investment?
14 respostas
0/9000

FeatureFest is coming BACK to Dreamforce for its second year!  

 

✨ Take a personalized feature match quiz and discover innovations tailored to your needs 

🎤 See what’s new in action with live demos 

📺 Join Release Readiness Live sessions throughout the day 

🎁 Grab exclusive swag (and some snacks!) 

 

📍 Moscone West, Level 2 

 

Come see what’s new. Find your next favorite feature. Get ready for what’s next.FeatureFest is coming BACK to Dreamforce for its second year! ✨ Take a personalized feature match quiz and discover innovations tailored to your needs 🎤 See what’s new in action with live demos 📺 Jo

4 comentários
0/9000
20 comentários
0/9000

Hi Team 

 

I have published segment in SFMC from data cloud whihc uses relative attributes of DMOs. Because of these relative attributes the data is coming in JSON format. 

 

I am using SSJS script to parse this data however script worked for few records but failing for large data. I have to parse around 3 lakh records or may be more than that. 

 

Is there any other solution to parse segment data so that I can use it further.

7 respostas
  1. 2 de set., 12:52

    Hi Ashwini, thanks for the detail, and good news, your current setup is basically the point 2 approach done well. 

     

    On point 1, the important one: flattening upstream does not conflict with all campaigns needing the data, it is the opposite. If you pre-shape those related attributes into scalar fields in Data Cloud with a Calculated Insight and activate those instead of the raw related attributes, the data lands flat for every campaign, so no SSJS parsing is needed anywhere downstream. That removes the timeout entirely rather than managing it. If the campaigns only filter on a handful of derived values, model just those in the CI. 

     

    Point 2 (chunking) was simply this: never parse all 300k in one Script Activity run, slice the DE and process one batch per run so each run stays under the script time limit. What you built, an initial load in chunks then hourly deltas of only new or updated rows, is exactly that pattern, so you are on the right track. 

     

    One refinement as volume grows: drive the delta from a reliable last-modified watermark rather than comparing two full DEs, it stays cheap even at millions of rows. But if the Calculated Insight route is feasible, that is still the cleanest long-term fix since it deletes the parsing step altogether.

0/9000

Hi Everyone,  

 

We're planning to migrate from a 3rd-party SMS Activity to SFMC MobileConnect for sending one-way transactional SMS using an Alpha Sender ID to UK customers

 

Note: Our SFMC Business Unit is dedicated to transactional messaging only and is not used for marketing communications

 

Current architecture

  • Customer consent is maintained in Salesforce Service Cloud using Contact Point Consent.
  • When an order is cancelled, Order Management System will trigger an event to AIS and AIS sends an event payload to the Journey API Entry Event in SFMC.
  • The journey then sends the transactional SMS using 3rd Party SMS activity.

Based on my understanding & questions: 

 

Based on my understanding, marketing SMS requires consent, while transactional SMS does not. Since our consent is managed in Service Cloud, I'd like to validate the recommended Salesforce approach.

  1. Should Journey Builder check Contact Point Consent before sending a transactional SMS?
  2.  As per my understanding, transactional SMS doesn't require marketing consent. In that case, should an order cancellation SMS still be sent when the customer's SMS Contact Point Consent is Opted Out, or is it a Salesforce best practice to suppress the message based on consent? 
  3. For a one-way setup using an Alpha Sender ID when sending to UK customers, do we need to configure a MobileConnect keyword, or can Journey Builder send the SMS without any keyword configuration?

Has anyone implemented a similar architecture or can share Salesforce best practices? 

 

Thanks!

2 respostas
  1. 31 de ago., 15:40

    Since this is SFMC/MobileConnect (Journey Builder, Alpha Sender ID), not core Apex/Flow - this is Marketing Cloud territory, and the consent/Journey questions below sit at the seam between Service Cloud (Contact Point Consent) and Marketing Cloud (Journey Builder), which is exactly the kind of cross-system sync point worth being explicit about. 

     

    1. Should Journey Builder check Contact Point Consent before sending? 

    Yes - but the check should be scoped correctly, and that scoping is the actual design decision here. Under UK PECR, a purely transactional message with no promotional content (order cancellation notice, no upsell/cross-sell copy) is generally exempt from PECR's marketing consent requirements, so legally you don't need marketing SMS consent to send it. But "don't legally need consent" isn't the same as "don't check anything" - you still want to confirm the number is valid/deliverable and hasn't been globally suppressed (e.g. customer explicitly said "don't text me at all," a hard bounce/carrier complaint flag, etc.). So check consent, but check the right purpose

    , not blanket marketing consent.  

     

    2. Should the SMS still send if SMS Contact Point Consent is Opted Out? 

    This depends entirely on what that Opted Out flag actually represents in your data model, and that's the thing to nail down before building rather than assume: 

    • If Contact Point Consent is modeled with a single generic "SMS" consent purpose shared across marketing and transactional, an opt-out there is ambiguous you can't tell if the customer opted out of promos specifically or all SMS contact.
    • If it's modeled with separate purposes (e.g. "Marketing SMS" vs "Service/Transactional SMS"), Journey Builder should check the Transactional purpose specifically, independent of marketing opt-out status a customer who opted out of promotional texts still generally expects to get their order-cancellation notice.

    My recommendation: model (or confirm you already have) a distinct Transactional/Service SMS consent purpose in Contact Point Consent, separate from Marketing SMS, and have the journey's decision split key off that specific purpose. This sidesteps the legal ambiguity entirely rather than making a judgment call in Journey Builder logic. This is a genuine "pause and confirm with legal/compliance + whoever owns the CPC data model" item, not something to default on silently. 

      

    3. Do you need a MobileConnect keyword for the one-way Alpha Sender ID?

     

      

    No - and functionally it wouldn't do much even if configured. Alphanumeric sender IDs only support one-way messaging by default because the sender isn't a real phone number carriers can route replies to, so standard keyword-based opt-outs like STOP don't work natively with alphanumeric IDs. There's no inbound path to that Alpha ID for a keyword to catch. Practical implications: 

     

    • Skip keyword config for this Sender ID - it's not reachable for two way interaction, so it's dead config.
    • Since the customer can't reply, best practice is to put an alternative contact method in the message body itself (support phone number or a link) so they have some way to react if needed - this is called out as standard practice in MobileConnect implementations specifically because Alpha IDs can't receive replies.
    • If any part of your estate does need two way keyword handling (STOP registration, etc.), that has to live on a numeric long/short code, not this Alpha ID separate Sender ID/code entirely if that need exists elsewhere.

    One architecture risk worth flagging explicitly: confirm whether the CPC data your journey checks is synced into SFMC via Marketing Cloud Connector (near real time, so there's a sync lag window) or whether you need a real time lookup back to Service Cloud at send time. Given this is triggered off a same day event (order cancellation → immediate SMS), a same day opt-out landing in that lag window is a plausible edge case worth a decision, not an assumption.

0/9000

🏆 IT’S TIME!!! Marketing Champion applications are now open! 🏆  

 

Do You Know a Marketer or Could It Be You?

✅ Loves sharing their expertise through blogs, podcasts and answering questions 

✅ Consistently gives back to the Marketing community 

✅ Passionate about helping others learn new skills 

✅ Driven to help others skill up and grow 

 

As a Champion, you'll: 

🌐 Build real connections with marketers doing this work around the world 

💡 Get early access to product launches and knowledge-sharing opportunities 

🤝 Work directly with our product team to help shape what's next 

 

Now’s your chance. Applications close on September 26th, 2026. 

 

Apply today ✍🏼: https://sfdc.co/ba2lOa 

Nominate someone✍🏼: https://sfdc.co/b4KQ8d

Learn more  🔗:  https://sfdc.co/bXTIyM

🏆 IT’S TIME!!! Marketing Champion applications are now open! 🏆 Do You Know a Marketer or Could It Be You? 

@* Marketing Cloud Engagement * @* MC Account Engagement (fka Pardot) * @Marketer Group, London, UK, @Marketer Group, Indianapolis, US, @Marketer Group, Madrid, ES, @Marketer Group, Philadelphia, US, @Marketer Group, Philadelphia, US, @Marketer Group, Twin Cities, US, @Marketer Group, Austin, US, @Marketer Group, Atlanta, US, @Marketer Group, Jaipur, IN, @Salesforce Marketer Group, Pune, India, @Marketer Group, Mexico City, MX @Trailblazer Community Cove 

7 comentários
0/9000

Our marketing team has been historically creating a new lead for each and every time a person "raises their hand" for a specific product -- like if they filled out a form online or attended a webinar or visited a both, etc. This has resulted in duplicate leads. We are working on correcting this, doing some de-duplication efforts, and making use of campaigns and campaign members to record what marketing interactions a person engaged with. This works but the sticking point is how do we track product interest

-- for example prospect was interested in Product A in January and Product B in July. Could be a current customer or someone we've never done business with before. 

 

My gut reaction is that we use opportunities for this -- every interest in a product is it's own opportunity record that they can work through all the stages -- however sometimes the sales person, account manager, BDR, or Solution Engineer finds out quickly that they are not actually qualified for that product and DQ the "lead" -- if we use opportunities like I was thinking -- we'd have a ton of "garbage" opportunities. 

 

We are migrating from Marketing Cloud Engagment (fka Exact-Target) TO Marketing Cloud Account Engagement (fka Pardot) -- so we are using this as an opportunity to clean house and fix processes 

 

Thoughts/Ideas on how to handle this? 

 

#Marketing Cloud  #Pardot B2b Marketing Automation

4 respostas
0/9000

Hey admins, 

 

Based on the upcoming mandatory change to enforce an IP allowlist for MCE access (

details here), how are you compiling your IP allowlist? Are you:

  1. Changing to "Log Allowlist Violations" mode so new logins are added to the Access Log, and then reviewing and adding IPs to the allowlist as users log in naturally?
  2. Notifying all of your users that they need to provide their IP(s) up front?

Both seem a little clunky so I'm curious how other admins are approaching it - particularly enterprise orgs with a lot of users (I have over 80 users and didn't qualify for Salesforce's auto-generated IP allowlist recommendations, which is limited to orgs with under 100 IPs). 

 

Thanks for your thoughts!

4 respostas
0/9000

📣 New certification, new webinar! 

The Marketing Cloud Next Consultant exam launches August 21 and we're pulling together the people who know it best to help you prep. This is the perfect time to get insider tips straight from the source before you dive into studying.  

 

Marketing Cloud Next Consultant: Exam Prep Webinar

 

🗓️    Aug 24, 2026 

 🕛   12:00 PM ET 

Register herehttps://sfdc.co/bOIVsh

 

We've got an incredible lineup joining us:

 

👉  @Melanie Wachs, Certification Exam Senior Manager, Salesforce 

👉 @Jennievee Huseman, Certification Exam Manager, Salesforce 

👉 @Greg Gifford, Senior Director, Enablement, Merkle 

👉 @François Perret, Founder @Bamsoo 

 

If you or your colleagues are thinking about this exam, come learn all about it. Bring your curiosity and your questions.  Who knows, maybe we'll have a couple of surprises. 👀 

📣 New certification, new webinar! The Marketing Cloud Next Consultant exam launches August 21 and we're pulling together the people who know it best to help you prep.

1 comentário
0/9000