In most cases, when a CTA gets created using a defined playbook, we have a specific Reason we want to define for that CTA. This includes when a CSM manually creates a CTA and attaches a playbook.
We have some issues where CSMs select the wrong CTA Reason when creating a new CTA and assigning a playbook and this throws off our reporting. It would be helpful to be able to pre-determine a reason code at the playbook level so that when the CSM creates a CTA it automatically inherits the reason code. There could be an override capability, with a prompt that says something like "You are overriding the pre-defined Reason for this CTA. Do you wish to continue?"
Perhaps the "Attach playbook" should be moved up earlier in the creation process so as to accomodate an inherited Reason.
New Idea
CTAs: Allow ability to set CTA Reason at Playbook level
+7I might go even further, Jeff, and say that the whole CTA-Playbook kit'n'kaboodle should be able to be selected from a menu of options. There are certain CTAs that are as-needed procedural steps, or significant projects that get spun up for a customer as needed. I don't want a CSM to have to think about what the CTA's name, reason, priority, playbook, etc. are supposed to be.
Program Director, CS Innovation @ Gainsight
+4I do agree that the method of selecting Playbooks as part of a CTA needs to be improved, but for the "significant projects" though, couldn't that be incorporated into a Success Plan template? I am really thinking of this idea as applying to those as-needed situations.
Perhaps we should also, at the playbook level, include an option as "Manually Selectable" so that only certain playbooks are visible for the CSM to select when creating a CTA.
Perhaps we should also, at the playbook level, include an option as "Manually Selectable" so that only certain playbooks are visible for the CSM to select when creating a CTA.
Jeff Kirkpatrick
1 person likes this
+1I agree with Jeff on this feature request. I just had to through the default reason tonight and move the CTAs to the appropriate reason. And, with the requirement for many reasons for reporting, it is a bit much to ask the CSM to remember which reason goes with which playbook, especially for the more ambiguous CTAs that could fall under one or more reasons. With a playbook, we know the type (risk, event, etc.)--the reason should be a part of the playbook as well.
+4Any chance of this getting implemented soon? Definitely would take the hassle out of CSMs selecting the wrong Reason Code.
+1Thanks for sharing this,I've tagged our PM to take a look into this.
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.