header

Level of detail in Product Mapper

  • 11 March 2020
  • 2 replies
  • 90 views

Userlevel 5
Badge

Looking for some best practices and experiences from other PX users here…

When we started with PX some months ago, we configured quite a detailed Product Map containing most of the buttons in our software. At the moment, we get the feeling that we have included to many features in the map, for 2 reasons:

  • The weekly automated report emails contain a lot of very basic features which about every user is using (and should be using), but don't give any information on the more interesting (and important) features that we actually would like to see.
  • With every new release, our R&D team is updating features and also ID's used in the mapping, making it very hard to keep our mapping up to date.

At the moment, we are thinking of removing a lot of features from the mapping, only keeping those that we are actually interesting in for analytics purposes and the ones we are using to trigger engagements.

Did anyone have similar experiences or consider this as well? What are your experiences and learnings?


2 replies

Userlevel 4

Hi @Jef Vanlaer!  We’ve run into the same issue w/ changing CSS selectors and IDs.  We’re likely going to add a customer gs=”name of element” properties to our code.  See https://support.gainsight.com/PX/Instrument_Your_Product/Advanced_Instrumentation#Use_Additional_Page_Elements_for_Instrumentation.  Hope that helps!

Userlevel 5
Badge

Thanks for the reply @AdamZ . We're already adding and maintaining to the code for Mixpanel currently, and our R&D is (understandably) not keen on maintaining 2 systems. For CS purposes, we probably don't need the level of details in usage analytics coming from mapping all individual features, so that's why we are thinking of decreasing the size of our Product Map.

Reply