Control Score Scale at Measure Level

Hi Kate, this is an interesting scenario. Are you able to share details about the scorecard dimension and what the possible manual scores would mean?

Hi Dan,

For example, if the measure is "Product Gap", this is something that we feel should never contribute positively to the score.  If there's a product gap, it can be neutral, bad, or worse, but never "good" or "great":

But since this is a manual measure, we have to rely on the CSM to never choose a value that has "N/A" as the help text:

Thanks Kate, that makes sense. I can see how in the context of "Product Gap" you would be focused on just risks. 

Another way to approach this might be to define the scorecard dimension in terms of how effectively the product meets their needs. Something along the lines of "Product Fit". This would allow you to manage risks (which would be product gaps) but also understand instances where the product is used very successfully by the customer. 

This would not only positively impact the health score (as a very good product fit should increase stickiness) but would also help your team identify positive product experiences for advocacy (references, case studies, conference events, etc). 

Thoughts? I realize it's a slightly different approach, but I'd submit that it has merit to capture both the bad and the good. 🙂

Thanks Dan - I agree with your approach here.  We may need to rethink the way we have defined some of our measures.