Absence of Scorecard Measure data

Related products: None

When manual measures exist on Scorecard, that have never had a value loaded to that measure, there is no record in the Unified Scorecard Fact table.

This can be problematic when trying to determine how many accounts do not have a score yet.  For example, our CS Perspective measure which is a manual subjective score.  To report on accounts that do not have an entry in that score, we have to create a Data Designer set to include all the NA records alongside the records with a value.

Would be helpful if Unified Scorecard Fact table contained an NA record when there has never been a value entered.

@darkknight - I was working on this as well late last week!  

I thought I was crazy that I couldn’t report on missing CSM Sentiment measure Updates. I too went the Data Designer route as well. Nulls/NAs should be respected in data. Great mention.


@davebrown2242 Yes it’s frustrating and causes us to create/maintain multiple data sources.  


@darkknight @davebrown2242 We have tried to add this to unified scorecard fact, but we had some serious performance issues, and we did not go ahead with it. We are aware of the issue, but there seems to be no easy way to do this.

 

Regards,

Shantan


Hi.

Are you looking this in SFDC or NXT Instance. Because in NXT, I can see the record for the Manual and Automated measure even “No Value” populated in that measure.

Screenshots for the same:

Which is a manual measure with no value populated. But we can see the record in Unified Scorecard Fact Object.

Screenshot:

 

Correct me if my understanding is not the correct one that you people are looking for.

Thanks.


@phani_kumar If the account does not have a value for any measure, it does not show up in the unified scorecard fact table at all.

 

Regards,

Shantan


@shantan_reddy @darkknight @jean.nairon 

“Man did not get to walk on the moon easily, but that is why we make the medium dollars!”  :wink:

Thanks for the insight. Hope there is a way to populate nulls/anything in place of nothing to avoid us having to maintain our custom workarounds. 

All the best,

DB


@davebrown2242 :joy:
We’ll try to figure out a workaround for the performance issue.


@phani_kumar If the account does not have a value for any measure, it does not show up in the unified scorecard fact table at all.

 

Regards,

Shantan

Ok. I didn’t test in that scenario. Got it thanks @shantan_reddy for the confirmation.


Not sure if anyone else has tried this but...I have been testing a rule to set a score to NA for those accounts with missing scores so they have a record in Unified Scorecard Fact. It does work.

Rule Set with 3 Tasks:

  • First Task: Pull in active Accounts
  • Second Task: Pull active accounts from Unified Scorecard Fact
    • be sure to pull in ‘Score Modified At’ field
  • Final Task Merge data sets
    • I’m matching on SFDC Account ID
    • Retain all records from both dataset

Rule Action:

  • Set Score 2.0
    • Set any measure of your choosing to NA
    • Filter criteria for Null values in ‘Score Modified At’ field
      • (these are the ones we want to create records that are missing)

Tip:

  • In your tasks filter as much as you can to reduce the query load, I only mentioned Active accounts in the above.

Testing:

  • Download the results of the rule from a TEST run. Here you can look for accounts that are missing the ‘Score Modified At’ dates. Pick an example and search for it in Unified Scorecard Fact, if not found then you have a good sample customer. Use that sample customer in the Rule Action filter and run the rule Manual. Then research for the customer and like magic, there is now a record for that customer will all null scores.

@anthonysabato - Solid strategy for the latest Scorecard Measure Update. We are doing something similar to @darkknight ‘s suggestion where we just migrate the last modified date to a custom field in the company object which allows us to report on NULLS and report on that field for missing updates.

 

I can dig it though.  Seems like the default Gainsight behavior should be close to what you are doing manually. :)

DB 


Yeah its a lot of work for something def that should be built in, same for running historical scores like 1.0 had.


@anthonysabato @davebrown2242 We did consider it, but as I said, there are performance concerns and did not proceed. We will get to this once the performance issue is addressed.


@anthonysabato  You are my hero! Had to go through some iterations, but got it working beautifully. Thank you!


You are so welcome @david_narunsky ! Side note, I also use this same rule to identify scores that are outdated and need to be reset instead of doing this extra lifting in individual scorecard rules. It my one “housekeeping” score rule if you will.