Skip to main content
Been thinking about this for a while. I see some ups and downs to this idea. 



Everyone knows what a CTA is and CTA task. And that you can mark the task as completed. However, at times you may complete that task and it be a success and other times it may be a complete fail.



Either way we, currently, just have the next task. Regardless if you should interact with them a certain way or not based on if the past task was a fail or success.



The idea I have is instead of having a straight path in tasks we have a tree methodology. This way if a CSM completes a task with a customer and it is a fail they can branch off down another road to interact in a more custom way vs if they succeeded in the task.



Obviously, the paths would constantly circle back. If task one is 'complete - fail' then go down path B. If that path B is a 'complete - success' circle back to original task path or else possible branch off again, depending on how in depth they want to get. 



Thinking about this it would give more interaction and time spent on a single customer, so it seems as this may be better for high touch customers instead of the customer base that is trying to move through a lot or the ones who may have a lot of CTAs to get through.
I actually agree with this idea, and think we could use it in other parts of the product (such as rules engine, or CoPilot).



It does take a certain degree of whiteboarding, to make sure you are thinking about the branches appropriately, but I like this concept alot.
This makes tons of sense IMO as well. 



Gainsight truly is becoming a business process automation tool and any management controls like flowcharting that help visualize and control the process would be very helpful. 

Reply