A member of our management team previously worked at another organization using Gainsight. He says CSMs were able to override the current Account Score on the C360 Summary screen, simply by clicking the score and changing it. The score still automatically statused itself; this was simply an option the CSM could use if they think the score should vary from what it automatically is.
I've scoured the community and documentation, but I don't see this anywhere! Is it possible?
Page 1 / 1
Hi Allison - it's not possible to change the account score itself. You can change individual measures manually if said measure(s) is configured to allow manual scoring. The best way to accomplish what you're looking for might be to consider scorecard exceptions where if a measure is red, it changes the entire account score to red no matter what. Let me know if that helps!
Allison, I have this configured within my Gainsight instance, so hopefully can help.
At first, I looked at the path Spencer references, with exceptions. However, we found the exceptions were limited (I think to 10 exceptions) and we would not get all of the exception types we needed. That said, my team still wanted a manual override for those occasions (and we know they exist) where your automated measures aren't grabbing the entire story properly.
Thus, I added one measure (named Override) and then I essentially weighted that Override to a ridiculous degree. That way, if the Override had a value, it would weigh so heavily on the overall score that the overall score would essentially be the Override score. If the Override was NA though, it wouldn't factor in and your normal components would determine the overall score.
For example.....
Weights:
Override - 100000
Support - 30
Adoption - 20
Executive Engagement - 25
NPS / Surveys / Customer Satisfaction - 25
One final consideration, if you do this, falls more into a "think on this as a best practice" item: we installed one rule into the Rules Engine that essentially reset any Override values to NA several weeks after the Override was set. This ensured that an Override couldn't be 'forgotten' and be incorrectly casting your overall score, due to neglect or change in CSM or whatever. Plus, we decided as a team that if someone was going to invoke an Override, that it was reasonable that the Override be revisited regularly and updated or at least affirmed as accurate. Without an update or confirm of the Override, the Rules Engine removes the Override and the overall score returns to its automated calculation.
At first, I looked at the path Spencer references, with exceptions. However, we found the exceptions were limited (I think to 10 exceptions) and we would not get all of the exception types we needed. That said, my team still wanted a manual override for those occasions (and we know they exist) where your automated measures aren't grabbing the entire story properly.
Thus, I added one measure (named Override) and then I essentially weighted that Override to a ridiculous degree. That way, if the Override had a value, it would weigh so heavily on the overall score that the overall score would essentially be the Override score. If the Override was NA though, it wouldn't factor in and your normal components would determine the overall score.
For example.....
Weights:
Override - 100000
Support - 30
Adoption - 20
Executive Engagement - 25
NPS / Surveys / Customer Satisfaction - 25
One final consideration, if you do this, falls more into a "think on this as a best practice" item: we installed one rule into the Rules Engine that essentially reset any Override values to NA several weeks after the Override was set. This ensured that an Override couldn't be 'forgotten' and be incorrectly casting your overall score, due to neglect or change in CSM or whatever. Plus, we decided as a team that if someone was going to invoke an Override, that it was reasonable that the Override be revisited regularly and updated or at least affirmed as accurate. Without an update or confirm of the Override, the Rules Engine removes the Override and the overall score returns to its automated calculation.
Spencer and Matthew,
Thank you both for the quick response and ideas! Matthew, that's a really clever workaround, and I appreciate the "best practices" tip, as well. Your suggestions are very helpful.
Thank you both for the quick response and ideas! Matthew, that's a really clever workaround, and I appreciate the "best practices" tip, as well. Your suggestions are very helpful.
Very interesting idea! Thanks for sharing.
Hi Matthew,
Could you give some examples of the exceptions you are trying to achieve? (and the limitations with the existing exceptions).
Would be very useful in enhancing the functionality further
Could you give some examples of the exceptions you are trying to achieve? (and the limitations with the existing exceptions).
Would be very useful in enhancing the functionality further
Aditya, most of the overrides our CS team invokes are to adjust the score downward from what the automated measures calculate. Usually, it's due to an outside force that isn't well-captured in the measures. For example, if the customer states their budget for the upcoming year is being cut by 50%, we may be at risk even though the usage, the NPS and the relationship is healthy. If we have lost a key sponsor within the customer, we may invoke an override. If an NPS response is particularly troubling, we may decide to manually adjust the score downward. Or if the customer has announced a change in organization such as a merger with another company, and thus we may be more at risk because the merging partner uses another solution.
In a nutshell, overrides are not common, but it does help our CSMs by empowering them to adjust the score on those occasions where the Health Score algorithm just isn't cutting it, or when there's an outside influence of some sort (budget, merger, etc.) that is hard to trap with the traditional usage or CSAT measures.
In a nutshell, overrides are not common, but it does help our CSMs by empowering them to adjust the score on those occasions where the Health Score algorithm just isn't cutting it, or when there's an outside influence of some sort (budget, merger, etc.) that is hard to trap with the traditional usage or CSAT measures.
Thanks for sharing them Matthew. The main reason you had to create a new measure (with an abnormally high weight) is mostly because of the limitation on the number of exceptions you can define?
Hello Everyone,
Happy to announce that your request has been considered and included as part of the v6.15 release. You can now delete Opportunity Records from GS Opportunity. Admins can now add Exceptions for measure groups as well as use conditions based on measure groups when configuring exceptions for the Overall Score. This gives them more granular control over measure group scores and the Overall Score. Only the measures within a particular group can be used to create an exception for the group.
This feature is implemented in both SFDC and NXT versions.
Thanks for posting!
Hello Everyone,
Happy to announce that your request has been considered and included as part of the v6.15 release. You can now delete Opportunity Records from GS Opportunity. Admins can now add Exceptions for measure groups as well as use conditions based on measure groups when configuring exceptions for the Overall Score. This gives them more granular control over measure group scores and the Overall Score. Only the measures within a particular group can be used to create an exception for the group.
This feature is implemented in both SFDC and NXT versions.
Thanks for posting!
Hello Everyone,
Happy to announce that your request has been considered and included as part of the v6.15 release. You can now delete Opportunity Records from GS Opportunity. Admins can now add Exceptions for measure groups as well as use conditions based on measure groups when configuring exceptions for the Overall Score. This gives them more granular control over measure group scores and the Overall Score. Only the measures within a particular group can be used to create an exception for the group.
This feature is implemented in both SFDC and NXT versions.
Thanks for posting!
Hello Everyone,
Happy to announce that your request has been considered and included as part of the v6.15 release. You can now delete Opportunity Records from GS Opportunity. Admins can now add Exceptions for measure groups as well as use conditions based on measure groups when configuring exceptions for the Overall Score. This gives them more granular control over measure group scores and the Overall Score. Only the measures within a particular group can be used to create an exception for the group.
This feature is implemented in both SFDC and NXT versions.
Thanks for posting!
Reply
Sign up
If you ever had a profile with us, there's no need to create another one.
Don't worry if your email address has since changed, or you can't remember your login, just let us know at community@gainsight.com and we'll help you get started from where you left.
Else, please continue with the registration below.
Welcome to the Gainsight Community
Enter your E-mail address. We'll send you an e-mail with instructions to reset your password.