Scorecard: Adjust the Scoring Scheme ranges to reflect logically

  • 13
  • Idea
  • Updated 3 months ago
  • (Edited)
The Scoring Scheme in Scorecard 2.0 is not logical from a UI perspective.  

The LEFT number in each range is the only one an admin can control.  So one would assume I would add my starting point for that range, and then the RIGHT number would calculate accordingly.  

So when I add 95 as the starting point for dark green, and then 93 as the starting point for light green, the RIGHT number in the light green range defaults to the LEFT number in the dark green range.

This is confusing because 95 cannot exist in both ranges at the same time.   I would, again, expect that since I'm entering the starting ranges (LEFT) that this would mean the range would begin on the number I enter.  But it doesn't.  It actually starts one number above.  This feels like someone took a programming shortcut and passed the burden of interpretation onto the end user.

95 is in the light green range and 96 begins the dark green range.

Then, in order for the Labels to accurately reflect the score ranges, I have to offset the LEFT number by one - so in the Scorecard configuration panel it looks like this:

This may seem like a small thing, but it's confusing.  I will add this isn't just my perspective. I raised this to our Gainsight TA today and he said it seemed like it should work the way I interpreted it and suggested I open a support ticket.  

I realize this is documented and is functioning "as designed" but it is not an intuitive design, nor is it thoughtful of the end user experience.
Photo of Jeff Kirkpatrick

Jeff Kirkpatrick, Champion

  • 25,508 Points 20k badge 2x thumb

Posted 4 months ago

  • 13
Photo of Aditya Marla

Aditya Marla, Product Manager

  • 3,104 Points 3k badge 2x thumb
Hi Jeff,

If I understand correctly when you define the scheme range, it is not clear as to which label the border values fall into (in the example you mentioned you do not know whether 95 is light-green or dark green, without testing)?
Thanks for sharing this.....we will range values to be more clear (i.e so that the Range and Label in your image are the same)

Photo of Jeff Kirkpatrick

Jeff Kirkpatrick, Champion

  • 25,508 Points 20k badge 2x thumb
Yes this is correct.  The Range column should reflect the actual values that would show up as the associated color.  If 95 - 100 is in the Range column for Dark Green, then 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100 should all be visualized as Dark Green.

Thank you Aditya!
Photo of Spencer Engel

Spencer Engel, Employee

  • 5,672 Points 5k badge 2x thumb
I agree with you, Jeff. I recall having to do some precise testing just to see if the ranges (using your example) functioned as greater than or equal to 95 or simply greater than 95. I would like to see us make this more clear.
Photo of Rob Begley

Rob Begley, Official Rep

  • 1,328 Points 1k badge 2x thumb
100% agree with this.  Very confusing and illogical. 

With the way you define the ranges, only being allowed to enter the left limit with the right limit auto populating from the bucket above, it is very misleading that the left limit you enter is NOT actually part of the bucket.  Also, to Jeff's point, the number should never be a part of both buckets visually, as it can only belong to one color.  The only workaround is to expand your left limit to one lower than you really want, which will cause even more confusion.
Photo of Michael Sweeney

Michael Sweeney, Employee

  • 2,566 Points 2k badge 2x thumb
I have been speaking to a customer about this as well. We understand the low range is set as a "greater than" but it is confusing. As the starting point for Green is 80 I’d expect the top row to say 80 and the mid one to end at 79. Currently the top one starts at 80 which isn’t intuitive at all. I understand there is probably a reason for this but that reason is not made very clear
Photo of Dale Burnett

Dale Burnett

  • 298 Points 250 badge 2x thumb
Agree this is very confusing ... it took a few weeks before we noticed that the Scorecards weren't behaving as expected due to this configuration.  I would expect is a minor change but would still recommend it as is frustrating from a user perspective ...