Archive

Genesys is attempting to configure relationship fields on the global CTA types (risk, opp, lifecycle). Right now, it looks like in the relationship section of federated admin, you will only get custom relationship level CTA types.  Should we have the ability to have customer level and relationship level fields on the global CTA types if you have relationships enabled? Or what would be the best practice suggestion? You could create copies of the global types at the relationship level, but they cannot have the same name.  Thanks!

This is a small, silly thing, but in Gainsight's support site, when I comment on a Ticket I own, I get an email with my comment. That's only useful if someone [i]else has commented on it. In our own Zendesk instance, I have a Trigger set up that will only email a comment to the ticket requester if "Current User is not Requester"

I'd like to propose an idea that we have the ability to set a "default" Call to Action detail section. What I mean by this is that we by default have two sections in every detail view for every CTA type.  These sections are "Customer" and "Call to Action". Let's say that the customer has the CTA type linked to the "Contact" object, and has several editable fields in this detail section. Currently, the CTA details tabs will default to "Customer", whereas the customer would like the ability to set the section to default to "Contact" so that her CSMs do not get confused about which details section they need to look for.

Wondering how much support there is for being able to load certain Timeline activity types to the Events in SFDC?  So you could choose one activity type to load to Tasks, but others to Events.

In the Setup Rule UI, once the initial Dataset task is saved, to add one more task to the rule the user needs to click Cancel, which is weird. Cancel should generally be used to cancel an action rather than creating a new one. We should have a different UI label here. Can this behavior be changed for better usability?

Would it be possible for us to have standard fields as options when mapping tokens in Co-pilot Outreaches? My examples would be dates but its possible there are others. Some emails need to specify the date that the Outreach was triggered. We could accomplish this if we could map 'run date' (with formatting options that would allow us to do full the date format  or Day, Month or Year individually.

Would be great to have an option to filter your C360 cockpit by CTA Type.  Similar to the dropdown on Timeline to filter by Activity type.  We have several different CTA types that the CSM may leave open for a while, and it would be great for them to be able to hide those from the C360 cockpit to see the others.

Right now we use Features to see which of our in app features are being used by our customers and the rules engine to populate this. Since Features are just yes/no we use comments to document the exact usage, ie 75% but our threshold for yes is 50%. Currently the comments system, replicates itself until the character limit is reach (ie. 75% 75% 75% 75%...). It would be lovely to have the choice to replace the existing comment.

There are many of our dashboards (esp. health score related) where users have to set the sort options every time they use the dashboard. It would be tremendously helpful to be able to 1) Have an admin configure the dashboard sort view as part of dashboard creation; and 2) have the user sort selections be sticky. First item is a fairly critical "miss" in the product; second would be very helpful.

We have been exploring the use of bionic rules to better slice and dice our data within Gainsight. However, we just created a rule and then noticed that you are not able to set scores within Scorecards 2.0 through the use of a bionic rule. This is a much-needed feature to be able to fully leverage the new scorecards set-up! 

Would be great if the customer tab bottom scroll option and headers stayed put so that our CSMs didnt have to scroll down to scroll over.  In a truly iedal world, a CSM would be able to customize their own Customer List to include what they wanted to see.  

Would love to be able to include Bionic Rules in Rule Chains. Also, FYI, it appears that that limitation is not listed in Getting Started with Bionic Rules > Known Limitations

We have a need to send an email with Google Analytics usage data to our customers as a step in a Playbook.  There is no set criteria when this may happen so we would like to use Email Assist instead of a CoPilot Outreach.   I have created an email template in CoPilot which contains the Reports however when I create the Playbook and search for the email template it's not on the drop down list - if I remove the Reports the Template it shows up.  I found out from support this is by design.   Can we support email templates with Reports in a future version of Email Assist?  

One of the ways we are using email assist is for our on boarding emails.  It seems that there is a restriction and only one 1 name is allowed for the TO line, however multiple are allowed for the CC line.  We'd like the ability to send one email TO multiple people vs having to add the other recipients to the CC line or send the same email multiple times.  Is this restriction a bug or intended functionality?

Hi team, Bringing up an idea that was investigated through the support channel regarding the ability to add File Attachments via the C360. Currently, if users have an "Attachments" section on the C360 of a related list built off the Attachments object, they can click the "eye" icon to view the attachment within SFDC, but are unable to "Add" attachments when clicking the "Add" button at the top right corner of the C360 section. What I think is happening here is that Gainsight is trying to add a record to the object, but the attachments are not necessarily records, but more so add-ons to an Account, which is why we are seeing the error message when trying to Add.  Is there some form of technical limitation that would prevent this from happening or would we be able to handle this as an Enhancement Request? Any additional details would be greatly appreciated!

One challenge with email from Cockpit is that it creates a thread that the user cannot "ping" if the email goes unanswered. If I send an email from gmail and get no response, I can easily send a followup on the same thread. As far as I know, I can't do that with an email sent from Cockpit. If I could turn on the option to always BCC the User on Cockpit emails, that could address this problem. Then I would know when the email actually got sent (because sometimes I've noticed there's a bit of a delay) AND I could respond to the thread in the event of non-response.

This was alluded to in a previous post but wanted to make the explicit request here to add a search option to the "Select a Playbook" field in the Add CTA process. Right now, CSMs have to scroll through the entire list of playbooks to find what they are looking for, which is a time suck.  It would speed up the process if the CSM were to have the option to enter a k

In future, can we introduce a mechanism to increase the number of activity types at tenant level.

Hi All, I heard at Pulse that embedded NPS survey functionality was coming in a future release. Do you know what release or timeframe you are looking to roll that functionality out? 

Posting on Behalf of a customer: Alrighty, currently when making objectives in Administration for success plans you can assign an owner by dynamic lookup or static owner. However, you cannot leave that field blank when setting objective owners. The use case here is that if the assigned user went to a success plan in the 360 and assigned a template I want the objectives in the template to be automatically assigned to me, just like when a success plan and CTAs are when manually created initially. Right now a user applying a template needs to manually reassigned all the objectives. Given our tool has the function to assign based on current user, it would be nice to bring that to objectives when applying a template.

I've come across a use case for a potential new feature idea regarding CTA assignment. We have CTAs that we'd like to be firing based on a 1:many relationship.  For example, if we are firing CTAs based on Opportunity, we'd like a separate CTA on each account for each relevant opportunity. Currently, we are able to do this by tokenizing the ID into the CTA name, however the customer finds like to be a bit messy even though it works. The idea I have is, what if we had the ability to set a field in the action that we could also use as an identifier. So currently the CTA is being creating based on Account ID, but hypothetically, it would be awesome to be able to say "Create based on Account ID AND Opportunity ID" without tokenizing the CTA name and setting the name as an identifier.

Customer is trying to use a rule to set the "Milestone Enabled" field to "True". I know there is a limitation in which you cant load to GS objects using rules engine and that would be our preferred way of setting this automatically. 

I was speaking with a customer today who would like to know it could be possible with Linked Objects to show 1:many in CTA Details. An example we discussed was, if an account has multiple cases currently open, can those all be visible somehow?

It would be nice to be able to configure the search fields of a linked object in cockpit. Looks like this is only off of record name right now. The use case im running into is an internal ID that goes on the opportunity - most CSMs know this ID from other systems, not necessarily the name.

My company has a requirement for all comments to be added with a prefix of date/timestamp/name(initials) on such comment.  This is used in particular when a CTA or task takes some time and there is a need to input ad-hoc wordage on a hourly or daily basis. This is really useful for reporting and review, however it can be time consuming, repetitive and there's also an issue with us being a global company using different date formats depending on where the individuals are located. Would it be possible to add a configurable hotkey or button perhaps, that adds a date/timestamp and username into the comments section? (that also adhere's to a local system's regional settings or is configurable)   I don't imagine this would be hard to implement and would save time on a very repetitive task. Many thanks!