I have managed to add attributes via IOM and managed to add guest participants, but not the 2 together, has anyone figured out how to attribute participant attributes to a guest record?
The answer to your question is a little complicated, so please feel free to ask for clarification!
The short answer is that this is a minimum of a two pass import process. It cannot all be done at one time due to the structure of the RE database.
Based on your message, I am working under the assumption you are creating full participant records for the guests in question. This is RE's default when creating a guest, and the only way guests can have attributes assigned to them.
In order to add the attributes to the guests, you have to be importing to their Participant record. This record is, in the back end of RE, a separate record from their Guest record.
For your desired outcome, your import will have to be structured like this:
Main Participant information is mapped as usual.
ALL information about the Guest is set to IGNORE.
Option in the profile under Output--->Files to "Include the Import ID of all matched or added Participants" should be selected.
* You will use the Updates file from the first pass as your import data file. This file will be time and date stamped and located in the same place as your error and exception files.
* COPY your Pass 1 profile and save it with a name that indicates to you it is for Pass 2.
* Add a new column A to the Field Map. To do this, right click on column A in the field map and choose to "Insert Row Before".
Map this new column A this way: Participant--->Guest Of(Participant Import ID)
The value for this field is in the Updates file from Pass 1 and is always in Column A.
* Set all fields relating to the main participant from Pass1 to IGNORE.
* Map all fields for the guests to Participant and Constituent fields, as you would for any Participant record.
* If you do NOT wish for guests to become full constituents in RE, you must tell RE this as Participants are full constituents by default.
If NONE of the guests are to be full constituents, you can use a Virtual Field that you would set up this way:
Field Name: NO
Record Type: Participant
Value Type: Participant is a Constituent
Function: Static Field (field name)
NOTE: If a row in the Updates file does not have a guest,you will receive an exception for that row stating that Last Name is missing because a Virtual Field is a blanket application. You can ignore these exceptions once you verify the rows did not have guest information.
If some are to be full constituents, and some not, you will have to add a column to your data file for this value. I recommend adding it at the very end of the file as this tends to be easier. You would put NO in or the rows with guests that are not to be constituents and YES for the ones that are to be full constituents. You would add another field to your field map by right clicking on the last field and choosing to "Insert Row After." It would still be mapped to Participant--->Participant is a Constituent.
* Uncheck the option in the profile under Output--->Files to "Include the Import ID of all matched or added Participants."
NOTE: You will repeat the steps for Pass 2 for each guest you have, as this process only works on one guest at a time. So, if you have one record that has five guests, you will have a total of six passes: 1 to import the main participant, and 5 more to import each guest.
You would use the Updates file from Pass 1 for EVERY successive pass.
In each successive pass you will map the next set of guest columns to Participant and Constituent fields. If you have more than 2 passes,I recommend copying the Pass 2 profile for each successive pass, as you will only have to re-map the Guest fields.
Also, if you are using a Virtual Field for Participant is a Constituent=No, you will receive the same exception I mention above for any row not having a guest in the successive passes, and you can ignore it after verifying there was no guest for the row.
Please let me know if I can be of further assistance.
Thanks Tiffany, that was what I thought but wanted to be sure.
Thanks again, Nicola