Archived ideas

Posting on behalf of customer. Currently the only C360 seciton that you can add Widgets to is the summary section which allows for six widgets. However you can't add more than one summary section per C360 layout meaning that you can only have a maximum of six widgets on any given c360. In the future it would be nice to have the ability to add a section (similar to Related Lists) so you can add Widgets to them. The C360 seciton would specifically be meant for widgets.

Right now, when you "share" a C/R360 page, your two options to share with are "Users" and "Contacts". However, the "Contacts" runs off the Person object in the MDA, which can easily lead to confusion when Admins aren't sure why their SFDC contacts aren't showing up, for example. Can we change this or make it clearer?

We're rolling out some new Admin training materials, as part of our on-going effort to get new Gainsight Administrators up-to-speed.  Check out the initial set of Quick Guides in Support.

Had a situation come up today where I needed to edit an email template with variants. Would be great to have an option to update one of the variants and be able to select to have the change carry to all of the variants.

When you create an Insight under Quick Insights, you link to a report from Report Builder. If you make changes to that report in Report Builder, the Quick Insight is not updated. In order to incorporate changes, a new Insight has to be built. As an admin, I'd like to be able to change display names of Show Fields, change/add Show Fields, or other attributes and have those updated on the Insight without having to create a new Insight. If the report could sync to the Insight that would be helpful but at least a refresh button would save having to create a new Insight.

Some users have been in the habit of changing the Success Plan Type and Name whenever their account changes implementation stages. However, with the new 5.1 update, this has been removed to allow for us to categorising objective category by success plan type.  The unintended consequence of this is loss of functionality for some users!

We need the ability to use different color coding schemes for different metrics/scores.  For example, we use a 5 color graduated color scheme for most scorecard scores but require a different 3 color scheme for an external NPS score to match what is used internally.  Currently only a single color scheme is used globally.  

Recently, we switched to using A-F grading display for Scorecards instead of numeric. We want to use + and - for A-, B+, B-, etc. However, when configuring, I'm unable to add the + symbol to the Settings. The Minus (-) sign works and is displayed but + will present an error when trying to display.

Currently we're using the RSS functionality that comes standard out of the box with inSided but I'd like to use a XML file instead. This XML file would automatically be updated with all new content that the community produces, similar to the same functionality that exists with most Wordpress or SquareSpace sites. Something like this would be incredibly helpful.

Would be wonderful if a client could submit a community idea/problem through the GS platform rather than having to login to the Community seperately. Maybe an SSO path?

We have modified the Color Scheme to have numeric labels of 1-5. We then created a mass edit report which is pulled into a dashbaord so CSMs can edit the overall score and make comments. We then want to export that massedit report. When we do that, the Range is pulled into the report as the Overall Score but we want to be able to see the label. The range doesn't mean anything to us. We want to keep the color scale as well.

I’ve had a handful of requests from our CSM team around this over the past couple of weeks, and I haven’t been able to find any documentation on this: Our CSMs are bothered by a few things around the manual health scores: 1. How small the slider is for selecting the manual health score 2. The inability to see what score is being selected as the slider is moved 3. The inability to just type in what score the CSM wants Are there any enhancements coming around usability with manual health score measures? Thanks! -Jim

Can we have CTA Mass edit report logic editable?

Hey all, A Super User came to us with a question to be able to quickly see topics that he had responded to, but had new comments which he didn't read yet. He suggested adding a filter option for 'unread' in the reactions tab on your profile. So instead of only sorting for latest or oldest, it would sort your reactions on topics with new reactions after your last, which you haven't read yet. What do you all think? Cheers,

I have a customer who presented a challenge when using Account Hierarchy on the C360.  They have a three-tiered hierarchy structure where some accounts have hundreds of accounts in the hierarchy.  Loading this many accounts to the Hierarchy section takes time.  They propose a solution that would enable the user to select an option to see only the child accounts and exclude all sibling accounts.

I have a customer who just had their Gainsight admin depart and a new admin take over. The previous admin had configured many rules to send email notifications based on rule completion or failure: https://support.gainsight.com/Product_Documentation/Rules_Engine/Admin_Configuration/Scheduling_Rule... In order to ensure the new admin is receiving the email notifications, they have to manually edit each rule one at a time. This is time consuming and increases risk of making a mistake. Have there been any considerations to allow a global replace in cases where a user is no longer with the company or a new admin needs to receive these emails? Or perhaps a profile based method for adding new users or removing users from an admin email group?

Our users would like to have 'keyword searche' in their own topics/replies Especially for very active users (e.g. Topics 359 Replies 12783) it is very hard to find anything in their own posts without this functionality. It would be good also to have 'Search' only searching in the subforum or List that you are in.

We want to give our team the ability to create their own surveys for the customer but currently they would have to create a new question that can't be tracked at an aggregate level and could be very similiar to 20 other questions that 20 other CSM created. I'd love the ability to create a master question bank the CSM's could pull questions from to populate the surveys, but give us a roll up of data at an aggregate level. Then we can also do quality checks on the questions that are going out to customers prior to them being sent. Does this exist or is this on the roadmap?

It would be helpful to make the report builder flexible to have the ability to create our own quarters. The formula field is also not giving the option to extract the desired information. The use case is the our NPS results : 1. Our surveys are sent out when the quarter is just ending but will roll up into the next quarter (our FQ starting in feb) . Due to this the out of box NPS dashboard shows incorrect quarters as per the survey active dates. although the responses may come in the new quarter but we would like to show the previous quarter for which nps is created/sent out 2. The nps formula is not visible for the admin to customize to define our own quarters as we’d like to, creating formula to accurately calculate Nps score because the report shows nps score either as count, sum or avg, none of which works for us. 3. Even if we try to create a formula for calculating our own score type, using the new formula capability , the score type is not pivoted ( all types stored in fie

I just set up an Advanced Outreach to push the prior day's NPS results to Slack. However, there are lots of days where no NPS results come in. I get an email alert: Gainsight support tells me that this can't be deactivated. I would like to avoid having to have a gmail filter simply to delete it, especially since, if I don't build it quite right, I might exclude these alerts from AOs where I [i]do care if no participants are found.

When creating a new record in Opportunity or any record created from the "add" button from c360 and using service cloud (support console); saving the record it will not stay on the record it will jump back to the c360 The customer I am working with would like the menu to stay on the record that was just created to review rather than reverting back to c360.

Just a thought but it would be amazing if we were able to view/toggle between different data sources relating to those people on the map. The NPS/time met are indeed one of the critical ones but there are few other we would find useful - # of Risk CTAs this person is associated with, number of open tickets, product usage for last 90 days and so on. (Understand there would be some restrictions in terms of text/field length to accomodate it all in a small box) Thanks

Sometimes there are CTAs that have tasks, and those tasks should have subtasks.  Has there been consideration around nested tasks? I know adding one more level would only bring the question of how many levels are truly needed? 

A user has requested the ability to clone an individual CTA that has been manally created to either a single OR multiple customers. User Story: As a CSM, I would like to leverage a manually created CTA across one or all of my customers if useful/successful and not incur the wrath of my overburdened Administrator. Admin Feedback: If the CTA becomes adopted by many CSM's this would quality for automation via Rule CTA, otherwise, a manual process with the ability to select from a list of the CSM's associated accounts to deliver a copy of the CTA to would be a nice feature.

In the Call to Action action in the Rules Engine, it would be admin friendly (and reduce confusion/support cases) if we could default a few fields differently than they're defaulted today. 1) Post update to Chatter = Never (customer has to opt-IN) 2) Post update to Comments = Once (that way admins don't end up repeating CTA comments by accident) 3) Include in Identifiers = True New admins are frequently confused by these options as they're not intuitive, and it would lessen admin ramp time / support burden to default these to more typically used options.