I might try to see if I can make it down from Bonnie Scotland but that also means I cant promise to be supporting the same team everyone else is 😛
Oh come on Allen, we need all the help and support we can get 😄
Hope you & @RobertT would be great to see you both, maybe @JMcJohnston can make it too? make it a roadtrip 🙂
... View more
To be clear, although I often refer to them as ‘points’ they’re technically not points, they are in fact a value of, for example each behaviour has a value, which may have a multiplier of X which then contributes to a total value of Y.
Here is a sample formula…
(logins >10) && (registrationAge >= 129600) && (((net_threads) + (net_replies*2) + (net_blog_articles*10) + (net_blog_comments) + (net_idea_threads*5) + (net_idea_comments)) >=100) && (((net_kudos_events_given) + (net_kudos_events_received*2) + (net_accepted_solutions*10) + (tagging_tag_count)) >=20)
Login & registration are both required, in addition…
A combination of threads, replies, blog articles, comments, idea threads & comments are also all required but as a combination, as such the member could potentially only ever post replies and never post in a blog or idea exchange. As long as the total value equals 100 or more they will achieve this required behaviour value. The value is based on the community relevant assigned value, for example in this case it was determined a member posting a reply held more value than posting an initial thread, and as such a reply has a multiplier value of 2.
The above provides a good outline of the multiplier values we often see; however these values can be determined to your own chosen values within your formula. I would caution any unusual extremes in these values, consider carefully why you’re giving the value, and what its impact would be to the rank structure and member’s progression, for example in a strictly support oriented community giving higher value to replies makes sense, but when this is not the case it could unfairly fail to acknowledge valuable conversation starting content within the community, in which case you might prefer to have all threads & replies hold the same value. This however would not apply with blogs, where the initial article creation would rightly hold more value than any subsequent comment.
The same principle applies for the next requirement, kudos (given/ received), accepted solutions and tags.
Note: where there is no assigned multiplier the value is = 1
... View more
Hi adsk_cmgrs 🙂
Creating a rank structure which recognises the wide variety of member behaviours can be a challenge… particularly as a rank structure by its nature is – unlike badges - a singular path the member will travel during their time registered in the community.
This challenge has become more present as many communities who in the past focused on support, now see the value in recognising a range of valuable contributions to the community which are not dependent upon the support objectives they once had.
One way to address this is to take the approach to recognise all the possible behaviours within the formula, and by assigning a value to each of those behaviours. For example as a quality marker on members contributions you might recognise kudos given, received and accepted solutions but these do not all hold the same value to your business and community, so you could say a kudo given = 1, a kudo received is *2, and accepted solution *10.
You would then decide what total value each rank should require. This approach to the quality portion of the formula would allow you to measure all behaviours without an explicit requirement for them all, and as such ensure a situation where for example one user who holds a lot of solutions but no kudos (or via versa) is still being appropriately recognised for their contribution to the community, based on the values you defined and not held back.
You can also take this approach to the contribution portion of the rank structure, for example rather than recognising posts, you could recognise blog articles, TKB, ideas etc. all with their appropriate assigned value.
I hope that helps but let me know if you have any questions.
... View more
We're exploring this option at the moment. The prospect of re-publishing thousands of Support Notes currently in RightNow doesn't appeal that much though!
Our main concern is the lack of categorisation/sorting options. Search isn't everything, particularly when you have so many articles and products it can quickly get overwhelming for users. We would love to be able to guide the user to the right article - eg. Let them choose what product they are using, then what type of problem they are having, then present them with a list of relevant articles.
Labels are available within TKB which can help a great deal when it comes to sorting the subject matter and topics of knowledge base content. The lithosphere TKB is also using labels - http://lithosphere.lithium.com/t5/support-knowledge-base/tkb-p/lisupport%40tkb
... View more