Archive

Managing sponsor tracking on a per-customer basis is not scalable for my SMB customer success team. It takes dozens and dozens of clicks to navigate to each C360, into the contact section, to the sponsor tracking section, etc., to enable and accept matches for each individual contact. We have built reports to allow us to see which customers have contacts that are not yet being tracked, but this does not reduce the manual toil to enable tracking for each of them.We need functionality to be able to manage sponsor tracking in a central location across our entire portfolio rather than within C360 on a per-customer basis.

When viewing reports in C360 there is this amazing checkbox “Show data from all children”, which aggregates the report to include not only the data from the account itself, but also from all children accounts below it.It would be very beneficial to have this feature when configuring reports in a Success Snapshot. In our case, there are a lot of times when users would like to bring their snapshots to an important QBR where relevant information may be not only on the entity itself, but also its children.If we had such a checkbox we could make two templates - one with it unchecked on all reports, and one with it checked. Users could then choose what kind of data scope do they want. Alternatively, maybe this checkbox could be on the export popup itself, instead of the config.If there’s an argument to be made for data sensitivity between different accounts I would say it could honor Data Permissions that are already set.

Hi Team,Customer have a dashboard with several widget reports next to each other. So customer want font of the all widgets in the same size.Customer saying It doesn't look good and cannot be displayed to management when each font is in a different size.Attaching screenshot for your reference.Tenant ID - 11bc1a71-d3a6-44a8-a16d-b2babf4d5fd2Tenant Name - Checkmarx 

Greetings!In Analytics, the date range for reports is visually limited to the current date or earlier, but users are still able to manually enter a future date without receiving an error message. https://share.getcloudapp.com/DOul0E2L .The suggestion from a customer is to display an error message similar to the one shown in the engagement schedule when a past date is selected, to alert the user that a future date is not a valid selection. Image for reference:  https://share.getcloudapp.com/5zuj6KYZThank you!

When you use a Preconfigured Section in the new C360 layout, and add that section to various layout(s), then change the name of the Preconfigured Section, the name change is not cascaded to the section in each layout where it is used and instead retains the old name of the Preconfigured Section. This means you need to go into each layout where the section is used and update the name individually.I would like to see a name change of a preconfigured section cascade to the layouts where the section is used.

I think it’d be an immense time saver to have the ability to click a button that selects all available fields for a report and pushes them to the “Show Me” box. This feature should be available for any area of the UI where fields are available for reporting: Report Builder, Data Designer (Explore Section), Rules, etc. The current method for adding fields to the Show Me section is good if you only have a handful of fields you want to see, but any time there’s a need for 10+ fields, the number of clicks required just to see data starts to get out of hand. The same goes for building rules. Say I want to add a Transform to the end of a rule that has a large number of fields. Rather than clicking one button that would copy/paste all available fields into the Show Me section (and delete the one or two I don’t need), I’d have to click and drag each field over one at a time. 

Is there any thought to adding other data types to the attribute sections, specifically like dropdown lists? It would make filtering easier.

This is something I find really overwhelmingly frustrating, but I position fields in my attributes boxes on the C360 so that they appear in a specific order. However, when I work on my laptop, I keep my window zoomed out to 70%-80% and everything changes position, making it harder to use & less intuitive in terms of the flow of the fields.I’d love it if fields would lock into place on page layouts, regardless of the zoom/window size (within reason - thinking how in Salesforce for example you have 2 columns to populate fields or so and they stay in-place until your window is ½ size or so)

My use case would apply to Administrator roles; I would not want this in my community to apply to all members (maybe superusers).My request is to have the ability on an image in a post to tag community members, and specifically just for administrator roles, the ability to tag several community members in one image.Use Case:  Long story but I’m doing a weekly post that summarizes the news of the community, highlighted activity and a new segment that is an explicit welcome to the new members in the community. I have been mentioning them all by name (between 50 and 200 users per time) but it looks “Spammy” so what my thought is if I made a welcome to who’s new; and tag them in the image - it comes out cleaner and not so spammy - and makes it a bit harder to have other users potentially get spammy with the others. Example:  This week I had +82 members, and I’d like to tag them all in this graphi

We get the “Live Data” button when mocking up/editing dashboards, and also when we are working on configuring GS Home….but not on the new C360 layout builder. Strange. Would love to see this available in that feature as well!

Currently in Success Plan templates when you create or edit an existing template, you can assign to all success plan types, or a single success plan type.  It would be helpful if you could assign this to multiple success plan types (multi select) instead of all. 

I love comments in GS and in the Success Plans but its easy for me to lose sight of what I have commented on if I dont get a reply. I would love a hub/chat function that was organized by User and maybe by different types of of comments:Adoption Risk Timeline Comments  It would also be helpful if there was a “read” functionality so we could see and confirm the person tagged read the comment. 

Right now, I have a CTA Type that has it’s own statuses to match an SFDC Case Type. The problem is that all the Standard Statuses also show up as options which defeats the purpose of having custom options. Wondering if it would be possible to have CTA types that can be excluded from the Standard Statuses? VS.Cockpit ViewWould be nice to only show the custom ones I created.

We currently use the SPICED Sales Methodology in our company and we have launched a new cSQL process that requires us to collect a lot of information from a potential customer based on several categories: Situation, Pain, Impact, Critical Event, Decision. We have deployed this quite successfully in Salesforce but when we tried to assess how to run this methodology in Gainsight, the user experience is way far away from expected. It would be great to guide CSMs through the information needed in each one of these sections as presenting all the fields in one go without any tooltip guiding them is overwhelming.

We currently use the SPICED Sales Methodology in our company and we have launched a new cSQL process that requires us to collect a lot of information from a potential customer based on several categories: Situation, Pain, Impact, Critical Event, Decision. We have deployed this quite successfully in Salesforce but when we tried to assess how to run this methodology in Gainsight, the user experience is way far away from expected. It would be great to guide CSMs through the information needed in each one of these sections as presenting all the fields in one go is overwhelming.

We currently use the Qualification object in Salesforce to create cSQLs as these will still need to be reviewed by an Account Executive before the creation of an Opportunity. The current cSQL feature does not support this so we are unable to use it and ensure collaboration between the AEs and the CSMs in this process.

We currently have a bunch of Biquery connector jobs, all upserting into completely different MDA objects.  Due to the size of data in each job, along with the number of jobs, this takes a lot of time to run every job.  Compounded by the lack of ability to tie a dependency on Data Designers or rule chains to these jobs completing, if queues back things up, then our entire rule chain is compromised and makes our data state at best, at worst case some right, some wrong.So, similar to being able to run multiple rules at same time, if connector jobs are writing to different MDA objects, be able to run “X” number of jobs concurrently to help process data quicker.

Many of the Gainsight Admin is struggling to optimise the Rule Chains such a way that it gets complete under its time limit.It would be great if we have Avg. Execution time of each Rules And Rule Chain to optimise it further and easily.For Example: Let say rule chains is processing heavy data and every time it’s execution time is adding up by 5-7 mins. e.g.: 260 mins, 272 mins, 280 mins…In this case use can see the avg execution time of the rule chains as 270 mins. And can easily optimise or break it down further to avoid partial failure of it.

I import data from csv file with big numbers, f.e. 159.352,86 but Gainsight cut the number and shows only 159.352 (and it also thinks that it’s only 159,35 and not 159k). There is no way to show decimals with the current setup. The only workaround I found is to multiply by 1000 so at least the number is treated as thousands. But there is no workaround for decimals. They’re just gone.  Support replies (ticket #253038) that Gainsight supports only a combination numbers with a dot (.). In case there are decimals - it will not support any other character. The standard number/currency formats look the same as the data I imported, then it means that it's not consistent (see the pic)  Please fix this issue as it’s important to have the right calculations behind this data.  Thank you

Labels are useful and I can see us using them however I have noted one drawback. The Labels are visible across all products which will make them a nightmare to manage as we will have more than a dozen products in PX.I can see problems with multiple labels with similar names, renames of labels without understanding impact and perhaps deletions as well. My ask is to have the labels be Product specific. So, each product has their own group of labels with no cross contamination of labels. This reduces the risk of label corruption to each product.  I know we can restrict adding/managing labels on a user basis however we would have each PM wanting to add Labels and that will be 20+ people and therefore still an operational headache to manage and our recommendation to our users would be to not use or rely on themThanks,

As we go through transitions between account ownership between CSM’s it would be great if I could schedule a Company Search sync so that search data is up to date with the true C360 data. This is causing confusion for CSM’s that are newer to Gainsight and they assume that the account ownership continues to revert back, when the underlying issue is that the sync is out of date.  

With the rise of digital customer success, community has become a key element to the toolkit success teams have. To avoid a customer experience being irrelevant or confusing, we would like the option to provide customers with account specific information right within community content. Sample Use CasesAt the top of a Knowledgebase Article is a message informing the customer that this article pertains to a different version of the product they use/have purchased Community managers can create a custom page with an account overview, pulling the data from other data sources such as Gainsight CS and Salesforce Showing specific sections of the community only to specific customer segments (i.e - Beta customer groups which is recorded within Gainsight CS) Adding a “Reach out to your customer success manager INSERT NAME HERE” to the bottom of articles/questions for access to new features or as a point of escalation

One of my customers had the following enhancement request.  As of today an end-user can close out a CTA even if there are open tasks and the tasks will be auto-closed.  They would like to make certain tasks required so the CTA is unable to be closed unless those specific tasks have already been completed.  Can we consider this as an enhancement request?

Some feedback from our superusers: The option for marking answers should be swapped with the Like button. When they get superuser status and capabilities, they inevitably have a tough learning curve to adjust where they click when they want to like something, as the ✔ button is now the left-most button, rather than the like. While they inevitably get comfortable with the new UX, I do see their point: Like is the left-most option for all nearly all post types (question, article, conversation, product update, and replies on ideas.  It’s a bit odd that ✔ then moves in to change the UX on question replies, while Like is still left-most on the majority of postsI can imagine the downside is that the less prominent you make the ✔, the less likely it is to be used. But given some of the considerations for future improvements to the real-time experience, I think this is a pain point you should be aware of. 

Especially in our Community of primarily HR professionals, there are a lot of questions that are challenging to select a “Best Answer” for because often the question is just someone asking for recommendations or opinions. Typically we will change the question over to a conversation, but at the end of the day, the Community member is still looking for an answer of some design. If we had the option for our members to decide if it is truly a question, just starting a conversation or making a statement on a trending topic, or if they are seeking recommendations, it would help eliminate some of their unwillingness to select a best answer. The recommendation option would not require a best answer, similar to a conversation, but would allow the rest of the Community to disseminate between a conversation or a recommendation request. Thanks inSided team, you all rock!!!