Archived ideas

When creating a CTA action, I find that the "Include in Identifiers" checkbox next to the CTA name field is often overlooked. What this causes is confusion when CTA rules fire and customers either don't see any action taken, or they notice that an already existing CTA with the same "Type" and "Reason" is updated with the details from the most recently executed CTA. Is there any future plan to have the CTA name identifier selected by default, as I almost never see a use case where a customer would not want this selected? Thanks

I'm trying to create a report on our Google Analytics data that excludes the 'system users', where our product is accessing the product on our customer's behalf to do nightly automated tasks. I like having those pageviews in the data, but I don't want them in this particular report. Those users are identifiable because their username begins with "ss-". I can filter a report for "contains", "does not contain", or "starts with", but I can't filter it for "does not start with". I tried to add the "starts with" filter and then change the advanced filtering logic ("A AND B") to "A NOT B", but I got an error that that expression was invalid. So perhaps this feature request is really to support "NOT" logic in those advanced filtering logic, which of course could also be useful in Rules, Power Lists, etc.

This request is to be able to change what time the job that moves people from partial save to submit when using partial completes in surveys. Right now, this job runs overnight. This is usually fine but a use case came up that kind of causes an issue. Say you have an AO built like the one below https://cl.ly/2p2Q0Z2T3A1F This AO along with the second conditional wait would send a thank you to NPS promoters. However, if they partially respond(but answer the NPS) they would go into the survey completion wai

Can we have an option to choose Advance outreach model while creating a survey in Survey 2.0. Currently if we use a NPS question in our Survey by default it selects NPS survey model and creates an Advance outreach. If i want to use Generic survey for the same then i have to create a new advance outreach and select this model

Love the text analytics but we have a perpetual survey that runs and there is no way for me to look at the text analytics Q over Q or M over M. Please add the ability to filter the date range of the text analytics by response date. 

Some of our active community members suggested that the start new discussion button that hovers over the screen on mobile version of the community could be hidden when user is writing or editing a post or a comment. Especially on certain phone models this button seems to a bit on the way when trying to post something on mobile which is off annoying for the people using the community actively on mobile. Below example is from Samsung Galaxy S9 and Chrome (67.0.3396.87).

Currently, our inline survey functionality in AO gives us the ability to post a single question in the body of an outreach. Despite the fact that the question is present in the template, we are still redirected to a link when we try to answer the question. I'm wondering if there is any planned functionality to allow this question to simply be answered within the body of the email versus being redirected?

I am trying to export a report in report builder. It shows the first N number of rows with data in the table. When I export, it appears it will work, but then the email that arrives saying something like this: Subject: Gainsight Report Export failed Your request to export [NAMED OF THE REPORT] report failed due to the following reason(s)  : Invalid report details to export <EOM> It will be good if reason or error code is mentioned which causes the failure of report. For E.g.- Due to exported CSV size, Data Corruption or any other reason. which will be helpful to know failure reason and on immediate basis end user/customer can use alternate option (like Use Bionic Rule to export report in S3 Bucket, etc..) Let me know if you need more information.

I've actually had this scenario come up with two different customers today oddly enough, so I figured it's worth posting: It would be nice to be able to manually add time to a date field in the transformation functionality within Bionic Rules. The use case for both my customers is they wanted to add one day to the subscription end date on their Opportunity object and then map that field to the Renewal Date field in Customer info. So if the sub end date was 12/31/18, the Renewal Date would be 1/1/19. I'm sure there are plenty of other potential use cases out there too.

I think it would be cool to change the experience for seeing joins in the Rules Engine.  Right now, especially with standard objects, there are some many fields that have the same name.  I think one of the following options would make it visually better: Add colors to the layers First is black Second is black Third is green etcAdd lines to the layers So you can see which fields line up to which joins

With the old custom rules, it was easy to do a "null" value rule, because I could just click the slider bar at the top.  With bionic rules, its still doable, but there are more steps and clicks. One thing that would make my life easier is a new task type called "Customer data".  By clicking this task type, I could see it creating an dataset of your customers, based on stored settings somewhere in administration.   Administration- set up source object and fields to be used in new task type "Customer Data" (almost like a stored template dataset task) Bionic Rule- under "+ Task", new type called "Customer data" that can be used to generate a dataset having all your active customersThis might only save me 60-180 seconds, but its 60-180 seconds I would love to have back and ease my frustration with creating these types of rules.

It will be good if there is a report which tells that how many rules have failed with the reason.

When creating a Timeline post from a CTA, it would be great if the CTA Name would autopopulate in the Timeline subject.  For example, I get a EBR CTA, and I want to include my notes from the EBR in the Timeline of that CTA, I'd like the subject to go ahead and populate as EBR and then maybe add Notes at the end? 

Currently when you search for a customer in the search bar, after you click on the customer that you're searching for the name of the customer stays in the search bar. In order to search again you have to backspace and then type again. It might be nice to have that search area clear after clicking on the customer that you were searching for.

When entering comments in the Scorecard, the box on the right hand side of the scorecard is used by our CSMs to capture contextual data supporting the manual score. The box's height, however, is not tall and it is very tedious to see what has been written or to make changes where there is a significant amount of text. Is it possible to make the box taller?

Currently when creating a CTA with a rule we have the option of checking the "Include name in identifiers" checkbox to have an additional identifier.  In the future it would be nice to have the ability to include additional optional identifiers when creating a rule to fire a CTA when the name is not enough.

When configuring a scorecard as a Red-Yellow-Green (or other colors) or a Grade schema, Gainsight requires that a range in the 0-100 scale be assigned to each level. When a measure is set to that score by the rules engine or a user, Gainsight sets the score to the midpoint of the range (if Red is 0-20, the score in the background is stored as 10). In other words, every "Red" has exactly the same score. The Issue: When users are looking at the scorecard and the mouseover text pops up, the score is always shown along with the label.   This can be confusing, as it implies that the numeric score 'means' something, even though the user will see the same score for every measure set to Red, or Green, etc. More, for many simpler scorecard schemes, the numeric ranges set by the admin are arbitrary - it's the 'buckets' with the labels that matter - so the admin will split the numeric ranges into even thirds for

Global sections for 360 config are nice.  It is a bit odd that sections like Scorecard or Cockpit, for which no configurations are possible, are considered Local sections instead of Global ones. 

It would be great if the migration tool could migrate AO Configuration.

Customer has a feature request to configure the way group score measures show in the mass edit scorecard view. 1. Be able to configure the label. They want the ability to remove "group". They have measures within these groups but for reporting purposes they are used more as their own measures. Execs don't understand that they are a group. 2. Remove the top line above group. Why does this show? Measures that are part of a group do not have it (see Relationship Risk) and only the group measures do have it but it says the same thing. I could be overlooking something on that one.

I don't want to cram too much info into the repository screen, but I think it would be cool to add a column for the Source Object to the repository view.  This way you can easily see which object the report applies to.  Adds a little more organization to the report builder until we can do other organization enhancements.

The Scoring Scheme in Scorecard 2.0 is not logical from a UI perspective.   The LEFT number in each range is the only one an admin can control.  So one would assume I would add my starting point for that range, and then the RIGHT number would calculate accordingly.   So when I add 95 as the starting point for dark green, and then 93 as the starting point for light green, the RIGHT number in the light green range defaults to the LEFT number in the dark green range. This is confusing because 95 cannot exist in both ranges at the same time.&nb

Good Morning- We're having an ongoing issue that's being worked to a resolved end state, but it gave me an idea: Why is it not possible for an Admin/Super Admin to be able to see the creation path for objects/MDA records/CTAs/etc. in Gainsight? i.e. We have duplicate records.  What is creating the record and when was it created?   OR A CTA fired erroneously.  What rule/MDA record triggered it? This would greatly decrease debugging time and make the workflow of Gainsight infinitely more user friendly. Thoughts? Thanks -Jim

It would be great to have a "+Email CTA" option on the Cockpit and/or Timeline screens to save lots of time and make users much more efficient.   It could allow a user to pick an "Email Template" that they want to use and then it automatically creates a new CTA with a single Email Assist task that can then be used to send custom/templated emails to internal/external recipients.

Currently the ARR field is un-editable from the C360 page and you can't give anyone edit permissions over this field. It would be nice to have the ability to give certain users edit permissions so that the ARR can be updated from the C360 page.