Skip to main content
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

Contributor ⭐️⭐️
August 2, 2019
This is exactly what I am looking for as well. A primary 'Health Score' and a secondary 'Usage Score' based on the products that the Customer is paying for & using, vs. paying for but not using. I'd love to see these as selectable views on the Scorecard tab of the C360 (like multiple reports/views for Contacts etc.). The CSM could then toggle through to the desired scorecard as needed.

spencer_engel
Expert ⭐️
August 7, 2020

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.
 

Just had another customer ask about this feature request and felt compelled to point out that our recent enhancement of being able to calculate weights at the group level in addition to the account level makes @dan_ahrens’ proposed solution even better. 

 

You no longer have to set the individual measures to zero weight - i.e. you can have a group that you don’t want affecting the overall score set to zero while having the four measures that roll up to that group, such as Measure A - 50%, Measure B - 25%, Measure C - 25%, Measure D - 0%, and it will roll up to that group with an actual score per your schema. It just won’t contribute to the overall score. Previous to this enhancement, measures A, B, C, and D would’ve all had to be set at 0% just like the group.

Contributor ⭐️⭐️⭐️
February 20, 2023

I totally agree with this.  The use case I have in mind here is that I’d like to have two different scorecards, one more specifically measuring their health in terms of likelihood to renew, but it would be great to have the option of creating an “Expansion” scorecard to measure opportunity for expansion.  Those two metrics may share some measures (like NPS), but since you can’t have the same Measure twice in a scorecard, that wouldn’t work well here.