Archive

It would be great if the composer respected indented text in code samples in the BBCode. Any leading whitespace is removed, which makes a JSON code sample kind of useless, for example. Thanks!

In Journey Orchestrator we have the ability to see the open rates for each outreach/program that's sent. Currently, we don't have a way to see the open rates for CTA email assist tasks.  We can see the individual opens for each individual email, but we don't have a collective view of all email assists and the open rate. It would be awesome if we could have the collective open rate stored somewhere for email assist tasks so that customers can see how effective these tasks are with their customers.

Would it be possible to add the ability to modify the uniqueness criteria after a program is published? At the very least it would be beneficial to be able add additional criteria.

My client is trying to create a report that only shows the last activity logged in the timeline per each customer. We were hoping to be able to create a new field and populate it with a rule to flag the last activity for each customer, however, the rules engine can't write to Activity Timeline fields.

Right now, if a user creates a Task from a Timeline Activity Entry - the Type defaults to Activity.  It would be awesome if we had the ability to change this!  This way the proper reasons could be displayed and associated with the correct Type.  (Of course the user can create a CTA and accomplish this - but a lot of our users like posting in the Timeline and reviewing items in there.  So adding the additional feature of being able to change the associated type from a task created in the Timeline, would be amazing!)

I'm trying to load in CTAs that should have been created in the past, since they're based on the customer's contract dates. So, I'm using the rule that is running daily now to create these CTAs, and am running it for a historical date. However, the rule setup is querying for customers based on the [i]rule run date, but the CTA due date is set based on [i]today's date, not based on the [i]rule run date. For example, we create the renewal CTA 120 days before the contract end date. If I run the rule for Oct 3 2015, it should create the renewal CTAs for customers whose contracts are set to end on Jan 31 2016 (120 days later), and it should set their due dates to Jan 31. However, instead it: Finds the customers who, on Oct 3, were 120 days before their contract end date. (So, it finds the correct customers.) Creates a CTA and sets its due date 120 days ahead of [i]today.This is aggravating. I'm going to have to create all those CTAs and then set their due dates manually.

At the moment we can't customize the administration chevron but it would be nice (in the future) to be able to put your most used modules up top or in any particular order without having to search for them.

Similar to my idea at https://community.gainsight.com/gainsight/topics/scorecards-help-text-cheat-sheet But basically, instead of having a cheat sheet, you could add a second comments box.  The first one gets updated by the admin, through the rules, and says whatever they want it to say (tokenize fields, standard text, etc).  The second one allows the user to add comments that wouldn't get overwritten each time the rule runs. Thoughts??

I would like to get insights in how often notification e-mails are opened (by different ranks users) and how often users used the hyperlinks to the Community for the following reasons: - In this case we could state how successful notifications are. - Do users feel motivated to use the Community by these notifications? - If there is a change in the design or content of the notification, what is the effect? I tried to add some Google Analytics tags, but not all the notification links are trackable, since they have a unique URL (like best answer, PM, mentioned). Do you have an idea how to get this data or is it possible to integrate this data into the InSided backend?

When a customer changes the notes on a scorecard the last modified date does not reflect this change.  We understand that this last modified date only reflects when a score is changed.  We have a use case the users are updating notes, but the score stays the same and is causing issues in reporting because the last modified date is only showing when the score is changed. 

We've had a request to be more granular in ability to set recurring manual CTAs.  Our CSMs would like 1 - Bi-Annual option and/or 2 - X Days from Date and then X days after Start Date there after

We schedule things at specific times, like migrations, or events, or even shifts in responsibility. Is there a way for Bionic rules to know what time it is happening at? Here's my use case: I have folks that work until 5 PM every day. I also have someone that comes in at five and stays until after midnight.  I have a rule that creates CTA Groups based on when sales opportunities close. If the opp was closed any time after six o clock, the assignee will have to wait until the next day to get started on the task. If the rule could tell if this was after five PM, then I could reroute the assignment to my afternoon worker.  Also, I'd like to send out notifications based on if something has happened in a particular time frame, more granular than date. Like, if someone's server changes between 5 PM one day and 9 AM the next, I'd like to be able to notify the person in the morning that it happened. If I can only get as granular as the day, I can't be that discrete with my actions

As I am becoming more fluent in posting timeline activities, I am finding that several activities could actually be considered a milestone and thus a redundancy is being created. Has anyone else discovered this and what is your experience/best practice for choosing which option to select and track. Secondly, are your CSMs being measured on either and if so, what are your benchmarks? Thank you in advance!!

I regularly use Bionic Rules to test/preview output prior to creating a Program. I find it easier to use and see the full results versus testing a program. It would be AMAZING if you could convert existing Bionic Rule Setup logic into a Program Bionic Query! My understanding is that the engine of these is identical, just with different potential actions. Help a guy out!

At that time in the internet market, you find the lots of browsers but if you are facing any issues to using Mozilla browser so you can take help with Mozilla Support Number team.

I found with a few customers who have partial saved responses that convert into partial submit on Survey Expire Date, they don't make it into survey flattening due to the scheduling not running for that Expire Date day. This causes the response number in flatten object to be less than the number on the Survey Dashboard. Workaround is to extend the expire date, but was hoping for a more smoother/easier alternative by having the flatten survey reset one more time after Expire date.

In the image below, you will see that we have changed the order to priority.  That works as expected, the issue lies in how it displays the order. Notice -High -low -Medium The ideal and expected display would be in order of priority and not alphabetical. I do understand this is how it was designed but based on workflow I would want to look at medium priority before I would want to look at low. I think that would be the case for most people. The ask is to have the sorting by priority level and not alphabetical.

Currently when creating a CTA from the survey section you have the option to tokenize three fields: Account::Account Name Survey Participant::Display Name Survey Participant::RoleIt might be nice in the future to have the option to tokenize not only that but the NPS score of a survey and the comments. It would give insight directly in the CTA title of the participants overall feel on the survey. There is a workaround by performing this function from rules engine but being able to do it right from the survey tab would be pretty cool. 

I don’t know why the exports are in the UTC timezone in the first place, but it makes exporting a drag. Every single week.

In the new search bar as well as the old one, you can do an empty search. Press enter and you get the results for "". It's a useless operation, looks weird and should be removed in my opinion.

Being able to preview rule results from bionic rule runs without having to download a csv is awesome. It would really be helpful, though, if when sorting numbers within the preview, place values were respected.  example of how sorting works today: This gets pretty confusing to look at while QAing/ testing rules. 

In Playbooks permissions it would be very useful to also have the ability to View (beside Create, Edit, Delete). We are using Playbook description to give predefined guidelines to our CSMs. If I want them to see the description of the playbooks, I'm forced to give them Edit access which is not a great option.

When you hover over a link or image within an email, preview text is shown. I'd like the option to control how the Preview Text and Alt Text appears. This does not seem to be a functionality available by default. Here's why it's important to have this functionality available-- When using link tracking for emails, a Gainsight link is created to complete that tracking. The link generated is over 800 characters! This entire link appears in the preview text for email recipients to see. It looks a lot like spam. As a consumer, I'd be hesitant to click on any links that looked like this. Screenshot of link: Industry/Email Best Practices: [i]"URLs should match the content being offered. You do not want to have a URL in your email that then directs to a page that is a different URL. This may look like phishing." -Marketo

Hello, When I am in the SF Lightning experience, and click on 'Add' on a C360 related list, it takes me to a record create page, but in Classic. Is there anyway I can default this to always open in Lightning?

I am trying to look at the same field in the Show Me area and see three different lines in my line graph.  I would like to see the average of that field as well as the Maximum and Minimum, grouped on the By field.  Is this possible?