Skip to main content
dallis_king
dallis_king
Contributor ⭐️⭐️⭐️
July 24, 2017
New Idea

[Feature Request] Multiple 2.0 Scorecards For Each Account

  • July 24, 2017
  • 23 replies
  • 341 views
I would really appreciate the ability to have multiple 2.0 scorecards running for each account.

My use case:

I have my customer health scorecard, which is keeping track of things like CSM sentiment, NPS score, Support tickets, etc.

I also want to have a scorecard to breakdown our customer's usage into each of it's features. We have different features that customer will pay differently for, and we want to make sure that customers are using the features they're paying for. The features fall into three categories, Core, Premium and Pro. I want to have an rolled-up score for each of those categories as well as an overall score for all the features.

Currently, I need to have both of these scorecards merged together on one scorecard. This causes problems for a few reasons:
  1. The scorecard is very large and hard to read. Even with each of the three Features tiers grouped together, I can't put those groups into a "features" group on their own because scorecards doesn't support nested groups
  2. Using the groups, I can roll up each tier into a tier score (A core score, a premium score, etc.) but I cannot roll them all into an Overall score. I worked around this by creating a bionic rule to calculate the Overall score myself, but all I can do is average the three tiers together. All the measures have specific weights assigned to them, and when I just average out the scores, it doesn't rollup to be a true reflection of churn risk. 
These issues could be solved if I was able to create two 2.0 scorecards that could both be kept updated for each account. Alternatively, the ability to create nested groups would solve both of these problems as well. I know there is an issue where you cannot move a measure into a group after it's been established though, so I would also need the ability to do that so that I can keep all the historical data gathered so far. 

These ideas would greatly improve my experience with Gainsight as a whole, and would make mine, and our CSMs lives much easier in the future. 

    23 replies

    Show previous replies
    aditya_marla
    aditya_marla
    Helper ⭐️⭐️⭐️
    August 6, 2018
    Hi Manuel,

    What does the detail view consist of? Is it a description of the measure (i.e something similar to the help text)
    manuel_damian
    manuel_damian
    Contributor ⭐️⭐️⭐️
    August 7, 2018
    Hi,

    No, it's not like the help text. It should point for instance to a section of the Customer 360 where that KPI is calculated/detailed. For instance Usage would point to the licenses overview on all type of products.

    Thanks.
    aditya_marla
    aditya_marla
    Helper ⭐️⭐️⭐️
    August 9, 2018
    Got it. In the example you mentioned - the license overview is a section on 360? Or an external document?
    Would having the description of measures show up when the user hovers over the measure name help? (If you are using rules to automatically populate the scores - would populating the link in the measure comments might be a viable workaround?)
    cmultanen
    cmultanen
    Helper ⭐️
    March 5, 2019
    +1, is this still being considered? To account for multiple internal teams and stakeholders, we've resorted to creating a scorecard with 30+ metrics and grouping based on type of view. This works but isn't ideal since it makes the scorecard view very cluttered.

    Additionally, there are instances where we would like to have sub scorecards that use separate scoring frameworks i.e. RYG vs 0-100. This is not possible since you can only have one active scorecard at a time.

      ana_g
      Helper ⭐️
      March 5, 2019
      Definitely +1 on this. Was surprised to learn this is a limitation in Gainsight while I was trying to create a separate scorecard that applied to customers only licensing a certain product only to find that because they already met the default scorecard criteria, the Set Score 2.0 actions weren't working. We should be able to configure what feeds into an overall score as well.

      Anastassia Goidina
        jeffmancini
        Contributor ⭐️⭐️⭐️
        June 18, 2019
        +1 here. I'm wondering if there's been any updates on this? Definitely surprised this isn't available. Even just being able to set a second scorecard and then report on it would be enough for us.

        mark_walseth
        Contributor ⭐️⭐️⭐️
        July 24, 2019
        +1 on this. I went to configure a secondary scorecard based around client engagement metrics, and instead of being able to create multiple scorecards, assign to multiple to clients, and click through multiple tabs to see our general scorecard and engagement metrics scorecard, I'm learning we will need to discontinue the use of our standard health scorecard to track a a more granular engagement score for accounts. We are setting up the engagement scorecard to serve only our highest strategic account tier. We don't want to disable the current score (and disregard the investement we made to get this up and running) to create a new measure for these accounts that applies to different stakeholders at our company. This may lead us to the alternative to create an engagement scorecard in our Buisiness Intelligence platform, which diminishes the value of Gainsight and is something we were trying to avoid. When switching scorecards would you lose all history for the account score if you went back and forth? What other issues would this cause? Having only one active scorecard is an inflexible design and not meeting our needs. Please advise.

          shane_mccoy
          shane_mccoy
          Contributor ⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️
          July 24, 2019
          +1 to this!

          Has anyone identified any workarounds for this? In my case, leadership is asking for two different Scorecards for each account, with some overlapping measures. At the very least rule actions should be able to push values into all configured Scorecards 2.0, regardless if they are the 'active' one or not. That way we could display a CSM Scorecard that the CSM may be in interested in but also have Exec Scorecard that Execs may be more interested in.

          I'm thinking the only current workaround would be to use measurement groups. Thoughts?

          dan_ahrens
          dan_ahrens
          Expert ⭐️⭐️⭐️
          July 30, 2019
          Hi Shane,

          In your use case it sounds like using groups (and some groups at zero weight) would be the solution.

          Interestingly enough, this is how we do it internally at Gainsight on our own instance of Gainsight.

          VP of Customer Success at Forcepoint
          jeffmancini
          Contributor ⭐️⭐️⭐️
          July 30, 2019
          The overlapping measures would still be an issue. As far as I can tell you cannot add the same measure to multiple groups.

          You would have to duplicate the overlapping measures with different names and then double-up on any rule actions setting these new duplicated measures. Doable, but potentially a lot of work.

          Personally, I'm not a big fan of zero weight groups. They muddy up the Scorecard and can make the "why" behind the health score more difficult to interpret for non-CSMs. Having multiple scorecards is a much more straightforward solution.

          Show more replies
          Terms & ConditionsAccessibility statement