Skip to main content

Is there a plan on the roadmap to provide open rule actions for core objects?

Admins should be able to manipulate object data in Gainsight without having to rely on the API all the time.

Much like I can with the Company object:

  • I should be able to upsert every field on the Call to Action object directly through a rule without having to use the action template
  • I should be able to upser every field on the Company Person object directly through a rule without having to use the locked in Person dependency
  • I should be able to upsert every field on the Success Plan object directly through a rule without having to use the action template
  • I should be able to upsert every field on the Activity Timeline object directly through a rule

    You get where I’m going with this. 

The majority of GS admins are not coders. Even though there are some simple things that can be done via API, it’s still a lot of extra work to go that route (as well as increased risk) than giving us rules actions that allow us to choose our own identifiers and directly upsert records on those objects, just like we can with Company.

If I’m managing this platform, let me manage it ALL.

Please and thank you. 

If I’m managing this platform, let me manage it ALL.

EXACTLY.

Sitting here on an early Saturday morning, fighting with the Timeline API, just trying to create/update 136 Timeline entries….

What is taking me hours upon hours of testing and trial and error (and still failing to find success) could be easily solved if we had open rule actions allowing admins to edit any field in any object, just like we do with Company.

Please, Please, PLEASE give us direct open access via rules actions to any object… 

 @rakesh will this capability ever be available to admins?

 

 

Hi @darkknight 

Actions in Rules Engine is one of the core ways to automate CS workflows. While I agree in principle about the ask, we have strong application logic that breaks if data loads do not replicate the backend table structure. Some of our API’s take care of some of this logic internally. 

Tagging individual PM’s for visibility/comments/follow ups on individual actions

@Bhawya @monica @Anil Raj Pujari @Shilpa Gumnur 

Thanks @rakesh - I just think whatever makes it easier for admins that don’t have API/programming knowledge/experience the better. 

I think most experienced GS admins understand some of the core data constructs like CTAs, Success Plans, Tasks, People, Surveys, Timeline. We need simpler mechanisms for data modification. 

For example, If I just need to edit/populate a flag on a Company Person record - I don’t need to worry about the Person mapping.  Just let me directly modify the CP.  Maybe make that action allow updates only, since the Person map really isn’t that relevant to a direct CP update.

But creating/modifying Timeline activities directly through rule actions (without having to mess with the API) is crucial 

@rakesh @Bhawya @monica @Anil Raj Pujari @Shilpa Gumnur is there any update here?

You’ve already got admins out here leveraging the API to make direct changes to objects - but that’s a lot of extra work/trial and error, and limiting for admins without programming knowledge.  I would also argue that it introduces more potential for error to try to make these changes through the API.

Your competitors are out here telling us that their platforms are easier to administer than Gainsight, and you know what? They aren’t necessarily wrong.

If you are really serious about making this platform more accessible to admins, then make it easier for us to manipulate data (including delete!) directly without having to go through API hoops. 


 

The following idea has been merged into this idea:

All the votes have been transferred into this idea.

​@rakesh can this PLEASE be reviewed and considered for the roadmap. My “External Actions” are growing exponentially and it’s just adding more complexity than should reasonably be necessary to directly update individual fields on a record.

Please review this again.  I am currently attempting to clean up hundreds of thousands of duplicate company person records that are being created because you have to use the load to people action to update specific data points with fuzzy matching.  

If you have the GSID of any object, you should be able to use that as an identifier an update that row via a rule 

Terms & ConditionsCookie settingsAccessibility statement