Archived ideas

It would be great to see the field limit lifted when you're calculating fields in Data Management.  Or at least put up a caution sign (like the one you guys put up when we forget to validate the formula) when you hit the limit.   The current limit is hindering our reporting options.   Or let us be able use calculated fields in calculated fields to work around that.  

In S3 execution logs and in data management page at the bottom section of page it shown as "1" however we can have more than one page as result set, Only upon clicking next icon we come to know there are other pages as well. Can it be something like this showing page 1 out of 5 so that we will know there are more than one page in result set

We load data around tickets into a table in MDA. We would like to create a CTA for the CSM when there have been X responses from a rep. However, we only want the CTA created once per ticket. We've gone back a forth a couple times trying to figure out the best way to do this, but we haven't been successful in determining a way that wouldn't trigger a new one each day. Our date fields include: Created_on, Last_closed, and solved_on. Close means in a Pending or Solved state. This field will change every time the ticket is moved into pending. This means we cannot trigger the CTA off of Last_closed because it will be created every time the rule runs after the ticket meets X responses from a rep. Created_on won't work as there 9/10 does not meet the X responses on the day it was created.  Solved_on does not work because we want to use this as a notification to the team of risk.

It would be awesome if we had a a checkbox or picklist on the "Call to Action" action in the rules engine where we could say "Don't create this CTA if one was created in last (X) days".  This would be similar to how the JO email feature works, with the 30/60/90/Lifetime selector.I have a few customers who see the CTA come in, but there is nothing they can do to action on it and want to close it.  But closing it doesn't change the underlying data, so the CTA comes back the next day.  They'd like to reevaluate the next potential CTA after X days.I can do this by adding a date field or something to Salesforce, but we'd have to do that for every CTA type, which isn't really manageable.

As of now, we are able to select only 3 fields as identifiers per data type. But we are seeing some customer requests where we need to select more than 3 fields per data type in some cases.  Is there any plan to increase this number to more than 3?

We have a use case where we're wanting to close CTAs based on when users log back into the system. The original CTA opens when a user has not logged in to our system for 45+ days. What we would like to do is basically reverse the criteria for another rule that would automatically close the existing CTA once a user logs back in to the system so the CSM knows the risk has organically been resolved. 

We want to fire CTAs for when sales activity in an account is stagnant and engage the CSM to perform an EBR. The idea is that in most cases EBRs result in saving an account or resulting in upsell/cross-sell so we want to be just in time in these accounts.. In order to do this, I want to run CTAs on a rolling annual basis daily but if I do that, then some stagnant accounts that we know we've maxed out will continue to have CTAs fired daily. The only workarounds I can think of are to run this rule manually on a monthly/quarterly basis or instruct reps to have a perpetual open CTA that's always in the future. Both are terrible but just trying to think of how to activate CSMs for something like this. In an ideal world, we could instruct Gainsight to not fire CTAs in cases where it's been fired in the past X days. Any tips?

When I first started making reports I put a prefix on the report to indicate where it was being used such as "360 - CTAs..." or "Dash - My Contacts...".  Now that I have a lot more reports it would be helpful if there was a way to categorize the reports to indicate where they are being reference.  This could be manually set by the person creating the report or if they system could dynamically tell where it was referenced and then display that in Reports 2.0 the person editing the report could be more aware of where that report is used and what consequences it could have for users.

I am implementing a new customer and the topic was brought up permission set vs profile administration. Obvious reason permission sets is the route to go. And, this is what we ultimately decided on as you do not have to go in and make edits monthly. However, their use case was that they try not to utilize permission sets in the SFDC org. While it is entirely possible to utilize profiles for everything that the permission sets do it is difficult to maintain. They were ok with this but, they were mostly ok with this if the release notes had the updates of what is being added/edited. I verified with product that we currently only update the master sheet on support docs. Not stating that this was effected this release vs another release. A simple line on the bottom of the release saying, "Permission to this field on this object added to this permission set" is all it would require.

I'd love to see our Load to Relationship action expanded on.  Currently, we have to map to Account ID and Name.  This is fine on our original load rule, but if I am pushing aggregated data (such as ARR/MRR, Seat/License counts, etc.) to attributes I have created, and the NAME isn't on these sub-objects or in that data set, I can't finish up the rule. I have created other attributes that hold unique ID's, so I was hoping to use these as identifiers.  Which I can call out in the action, but since it is till also requiring me to map NAME. What I think would work as a solution is, on the attributes creation dialog box, you can check a box that allows you to mark that field as an External ID (which would also check the box on the backend of SFDC).  Then in the Load to Relationship action, you have to meet one of the following conditions: Map AccountID and map Name Map Account ID and one of the fields identified as an EXTERNALIDThis way we can make more use of loadin

If a dashboard was configured to be emailed via the "Email Dashboard Settings" screen, there isn't a way to delete (reset) all of the settings since all of the fields are mandatory (see screenshot). You are able to enter a random recipient/text into the field but a "reset" option would be better.

Is there a way to move MDA Maintenances to weekends? I understand we have extra triggers and verifications on the backend of our setup, but every time there is an MDA patch our rules are running late into the morning sometimes the afternoon. It is not beneficial for our team to come in and see one thing on their accounts and then in the afternoon it be updated to something else.

An idea and suggestion for others:   Gainsight Steering Committee As soon as we went live with the tool, we established a Committee.   The general goal for the team was to review and discuss feedback, suggestions, change requests, and forward thinking improvements.   We wanted to make sure we :  (listing a few reasons for the Committee) - discussed and reviewed any changes - had a home for the CSMs to vent, complain, and suggest - had a group looking at unused features to see what might be good to utilize - devised a way to track and manage changes and updates to our implementation - documented and communicated updates to the implementation - didnt just make a change for every email or verbal request, unless it was going to be a solid change for the entire team. - provided a voice for the CSMs - provided a place for a few CSMs to become a GS champion The Committee meets twice a month.   The Committee has a few champion CSMs, the GS Admin, and

Posting for a Customer - Currently in C360 Related List sections you can choose to have the report filter by a secondary ID, if two Account IDs exist. However,Success Snapshots added a related report, it will give the option to filter to account, however, no choice is given to choose which Account to go off of. A workaround would to make another MDA table, but that would be unnecessarily duplicating data and reports.

We have re-labeled the standard Gainsight fields ASV, MRR and Users as Orders, Pipeline, and Products, but these changes are not reflected in the Account Hierarchy section in Gainsight. I was told this should be taken as an enhancement request. 

With the changes to Report Builder, to see more info about whether the report is used in a dashboard or on the C360, you now have to click on the report. Previous to the change, you were able to see that info without clicking. We have a ton of reports, and in trying to clean them up and categorize them, it's taking a long time because we're having to click on each to see if it's still in use. Would be great to either have those use details as either a filter that you could include/exclude OR have them displayed in line versus having to click.

Currently in Data management we have dependancies like Rules,S3,Dataloadapi,powerlists etc It would be helpful if we have one more section named as "schedules" where we can list out all the schedules of above listed items.

We need a better way to track what individual contacts/stakeholders at a customer company care about. For example: Bob is the CISO and his priority is keeping his company out of the headlines for a security breach, he's also really interested in learning about Product X Stacy is the Director of IT, and she's interested in networking with peers at our events, and finishing their deployment of Product A by 3/31 There's not currently a good way to track these individual's priorities (that I've seen), but it's something we need to solve for. Any thoughts?

It would be great to have more date filters. Maybe a custom filter that allows you to see anything you want. You would not longer need all the filters you have and no one would probably ask for another filter after this update. You could have it set up so that you say case "Close Date" = DROPDOWN ["last" and "next"] then have a number field I can input any number I want and then after that DROPDOWN ["days, weeks, months, years"]

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

Posting internally for discussion first. I am a fan of innovation and pushing people to Gainsight.  But at this point, I am constantly having customer asking me to build reports in Gainsight that currently live in SFDC.  Most can be done, but SFDC has made some recent upgrades that are making it increasingly difficult to impossible to deliver on the reporting requests (buckets, in report formulas, grouping, etc). I am not the biggest fan of making this ask, but realize that if we want people to stay inside Gainsight, maybe it makes sense to create a C360 section type that allows us to display a SFDC created report.  We should only do this when absolutely necessary, and maybe we discourage its use by limiting to one report per section, unlike a native Gainsight section which can show multiple reports. Happy to discuss further.  And highly encourage us to drive our product to be even better than SFDC.  But looking for a short term win where we can keep people

Came across an issue with the CTA Objective type and the Distributed Admins for Relationships. It seems the Objective is made to be a default Global setting based on the Success Plans. However, the issue arises when you go to customize the Objective Type CTA layout. I am trying to add a linked object/bring in fields for one of the Relationship's Success Plan Template and not for the other. However, you can't do this at the relationship in the Calls to Action section. You can only do it at the Global Level. Furthermore, we can not uncheck it to be inactive/delete and recreate at the relationship level. Forcing all of the relationships to utilize the exact same template. I can also see this being an issue when a customer wants to utilize success plans for completely different objectives.

Hi -- just building up some formulas for a new data object and realized how difficult is is to pick the right field. My formula takes "total today" - "total yesterday" to get a value for how many actions took place over the past day. But, as you can see below, it's tough to tell what field is which. The hover works, but it's slow. And there is just SO MUCH WHITESPACE over there to the right! So... here's a request to make the field column much bigger. :-)

Could we consider monthly Community blitzes where all we do is focus on keeping our replies current?   I'm trying to prepare for a couple of upcoming EBRs and finding posts from customers that have not been responded to in months -- but unfortunately many are product questions where I don't know the correct response.  It would be very helpful if we could catch up and use the Blitz time to ensure things don't fall through unanswered.   Is there a way that Community admins can easily report on where we have response gaps?  

When you go into GDM and look at Dependencies, clicking on a rule brings you to Edit mode.  Suggest bring to View mode instead since would expect primarily used for understanding and researching dependencies.  User could then click into Edit mode if they want to Edit.